CD to FLAC

[Nikon1975]

Dear All,

I would like to backup my CD collection in a loseless format,

Is FLAC the best actual choice ?

What software do you advice to use, preferably for MAC, but windows or linux are OK as well.

What setting do you advice ?

Thanks,

Davide

 

[merlin el mago]

Flac is ok, FLAC web here:

FLAC - Free Lossless Audio Codec

Foobar2000, you can download for free here:

Download foobar2000 and optional components

 

[stokessd]

I ripped all my CD's to FLAC on a PC even though I'm a mac guy. I did that because I could put 4 cd drives into an old PC case. That made the task of ripping ~800 CD's more bearable (it only took 200 loadings instead of 800). It's important to think about the ripping process as much or more than the final container for your data. A skip on a rip will be with you forever. To prevent or minimize data corruption on ripping I used Exact Audio Copy for the PC, and when I rip on the Mac I use Max which is a front end for lots of open source tools, and most importantly for this task; cdparanoia.

Then comes the huge task of fixing the and grooming the metadata. I wrote my own FLAC tag editor in labview, but there are lots more out now.

I encoded everything in FLAC because I had a couple squeezeboxes at the time and they would handle that format natively. But I've dumped the squeezeboxes for airport expresses running to outboard DACs. The slimserver GUI sucked, and the combination of iTunes, and remote on my phone, and mt-daapd on my server to share uncompressed files is way way nicer. However I converted my entire collection from FLAC to apple lossless using XLD.

Maybe I'm being naive, but I've always converted lossless formats without worries, the only thing to have to get right is that the tags match across the conversion.

Sheldon

 

[Ron E]

Flac cuts file size by ~40-50% for the cost of an extra step in encoding/decoding. Nowadays hard drive space is so cheap ($60/TB) that you can get away with just using wavs. The format you choose depends on what you want to do with them. Wavs might be easier to transcode than FLAC.

If the purpose is backup, make sure you make multiple copies. Think RAID. I have heard of more than one person who ripped all their CD's, then a year or so later decided to sell them since they were taking up space (not legal to own the copy without the media, by the way) then lost their hard drive.

 

[merlin el mago]

I don't here any subjective difference using FLAC or WAV.

If you ripped all your CD collection do like me copy one in the laptop or PC & the other in a separate hard drive, so you can avoid the problem if the hard disk gone.

 

[kipman725]

If you rip with a .cue file using flac you can remake the orignal CD so it makes sense to save disk space and use flac.

 

[Pano]

I use dBPoweramp to rip and encode to flac. The encoding hardly slows it down much and I like the smaller files size. Don't have a big collection yet, about 10,000 tracks. So HDD space not a big problem.

I agree with Stoke. The big hassle is the metadata, tags, folder naming, etc.

 

[ads142857]

Rip in FLAC, many advantages:
- CD can be remade perfectly (possibly better!) if you create cue files
- FLAC allows tagging, including album art and anything else you like
- The disk space advantage is pretty minor, but still there

Ensure that you back up OFF SITE! RAID is not a backup, it is a system for 100% uptime (most RAIDs, anyway); this is not normally required. Offsite backup renewed monthly is fine for 99% of people.

Oh and it's worth only doing once. To that end, secure ripping is advisable - EAC or DBPowerAmp on Windoze, Max on the Mac. There is unlikely to be any difference on 99% of disks, but the reassurance that you have done it properly is well worth it.

 

[Nikon1975]

Thanks for the information !!!

Two question:

1) Is the hardware you use for ripping in any way relevant for the result quality ?

2) What setting do you use for the files ? 16 bit 44.1 kHz ?

Thanks,

Davide

 

[davidsrsb]

flac has file error detection, which wav does not, so later when you need to transfer to a newer generation of hard drive you have a check

 

[stokessd]

Thanks for the information !!!

Two question:

1) Is the hardware you use for ripping in any way relevant for the result quality ?

2) What setting do you use for the files ? 16 bit 44.1 kHz ?

Thanks,

Davide

Ripping hardware mainly determines speed of rip. Unless your cd drive is on its last legs. With reasonable CPU in 2004 I was able to rip 4 at a time with eac and convert to flac as fast as the data came in. I used a pc for the ability to cheaply do multiples at once and not beat the snot out of my laptop mac cd drive. The rips will be 16x44.1, that's the redbook standard for CDs.

 

[Pano]

Yes, unless you change the default settings somehow, the rippers always rip at the source bitrate and depth. They are basically just pulling the bits off the CD.

I've had very good luck with LiteOn and Samsung drives. Fast and accurate.

 

[Nikon1975]

Another question: the compression level of the FLAC affect only the encoding speed (not the quality), as the format is lose-less. is it correct ?


Thanks,

D.

 

[ads142857]

Correct - FLAC 0 is the same quality as FLAC 8, difference being file size. However, some reports - probably apocryphal and/or highly subjective - are saying that one some players with limited resources, FLAC 0 sounds better as it is 'easier' to decode. This seems pretty unlikely to me, as FLAC is specifically designed to be slow to encode and fast to decode. FLAC 5, the default, is probably best overall.

 

[merlin el mago]

Thanks for the information !!!

Two question:

1) Is the hardware you use for ripping in any way relevant for the result quality ?

2) What setting do you use for the files ? 16 bit 44.1 kHz ?

Thanks,

Davide

1) I mind NO

2) The lowest speed

The best accurate ripper is EAC (exact audio copy), you can download for free here:

Download Exact Audio Copy

 

[Restracto]

Just make it easy on yourself. Ripping to FLAC is not without its problems. The ocassional pop or improperly tagged song are just a pain in the azz. Use iTunes and rip to ALAC and you will get well ripped music and all tagged properly too. Foobar even has a plugin for ALAC so using the resource hogging iTunes for listening won't be necessary.

 

[benb]

I rip to .wav files and haven't yet felt the need to use FLAC or other lossless compression, but I haven't ripped all my CD's yet.

I second using Exact Audio Copy (EAC). I don't know if it will directly write a FLAC file, but if not, just get a separate wav-to-FLAC encoder. Most CD's will rip fine on most drives, but some that might be scratched or othewise problematic to read, it's better if EAC is using a drive with the 'right' error checking for it to get a bit-accurate rip. EAC has a drive test to see what features your drive has, but even without the "right" type of drive, EAC is better than anything else I know of. For an error EAC WILL slow down and read the area many times to try getting it right. This could cut your rip speed from 4x or whatever to 0.1x, but it's about the only way to get a good rip. EAC has the best chance of any ripper of getting a bit-accurate rip of a bad disc, and if it can't get bit-accurate, it will tell you where the problems are.

I had a CD with a few small holes in the silvering - in a CD player it would play for a half second, then spend ten seconds seeking, then play for another half-second, like that until the player gave up. It took a day and a half for EAC to read, but the .wav file played fine with only three or four 'ticks,' places where ONE sample was off from what it was supposed to be. The good news is you can do other things on the computer while EAC runs.