I am thinking of puttuing about 1500 uncompressed songs on a computer, all about 4 minutes long. I was wondering what program lets you copy uncompressed cd's to your hardrive, and also about how much hard drive space would i need.
Also does any body have any suggestions for sound cards.
thnx a bunch
Also does any body have any suggestions for sound cards.
thnx a bunch
is the maudio audiophile 2496 any good
http://www.audiomidi.com/common/cfm/product.cfm?Product_ID=962
how bout the terratec DMX 6Fire 24/96?
http://www.audiomidi.com/common/cfm/product.cfm?Product_ID=1868
thnx
http://www.audiomidi.com/common/cfm/product.cfm?Product_ID=962
how bout the terratec DMX 6Fire 24/96?
http://www.audiomidi.com/common/cfm/product.cfm?Product_ID=1868
thnx
The cd format uses 44.1 khz at 16 bits 2 channels with equals 176400 bytes for each second.
You want 1500 * 4 minutes * 60 = 360000 seconds audio.
360000 * 176400 = 63504000000 bytes
So you will need 63.5 GB or 59.14 GB (depending if you count 1 gig as 1000 mega or 1024 mega)
You want 1500 * 4 minutes * 60 = 360000 seconds audio.
360000 * 176400 = 63504000000 bytes
So you will need 63.5 GB or 59.14 GB (depending if you count 1 gig as 1000 mega or 1024 mega)
Flemming J P said:
Disk manufacturers use 1G = 1000M, maybe because it makes
the disks sound larger. I cannot remember though if they
are consistent and also use 1M = 1000*1000 or inconsistent
and use 1M = 1024*1024.
As for one of the original question, which I assumed was how
to copy from CD to hard disk. All CD burning programs can
usually do that. If you want better quality I recommend using
the free EACD (Exact Audio Copy) program, which I think is
generally considered (one of) the best programs for avoiding
read errors.
thnx a bunch
anybody heard those two sound cards i mentioned above...or have any other recomendations
anybody heard those two sound cards i mentioned above...or have any other recomendations
Konnan101 said:
Thought you wanted uncompressed formats? 😉
Yes, it can. You may need to find a plug in for MP3, however.
I haven't tried it for MP3. I think the program has some
option for downloading the plugin. Look around in the menues
or the help section.
After some very brief and subjective listening test (nothing
scientific) I got the impression that ripping with my burner
program (possibly) gave somewhat inferior sound quality
compared to the original CD, while those ripped with EACD
were as good or possibly even slightly better than original CDs.
very nice....im sure i will see the specifics to workign the program once i actually download it. 🙄
You can still compress the audio without harming the data. Something like FLAC will create a bit-perfect copy, but it'll be about half as big.
-Won
-Won
Won said:
Sounds interesting. Do you have any references to it?
I've tried gzip which gives a rather small improvement. I suppose
it might be possible to make something better by making
certain valid/raesonable assumptions about the type of data
to be compressed in this case.
well im thinkign abotu getting about a 160 gb hard disk and i only got like 1500 songs to rip, so i mean i should be fine on space. I mean i would sooner just use the eacd and not take any chances losing sound quality
BTW... no such thing as EACD.
I think you mean "EAC" which stands for "Exact Audio Copy".
Its a very nice freeware app that will do very accurate copies of audio CDs.
I think you mean "EAC" which stands for "Exact Audio Copy".
Its a very nice freeware app that will do very accurate copies of audio CDs.
MWP said:
Yes, I think that is correct. Many people refer to the program
as EACD rather than EAC, and I first heard about it under the
name EACD, which is why I am a bit confused about this.
Hello,
You could use monkey's audio compresion, which gives you recoverable file with about half the size of original and it is the most used lossles compresion. EAC is the best for ripping cd's. You can get codec for playing APE files ( monkey's audio ) through winamp, record it with nero etc.
You could use monkey's audio compresion, which gives you recoverable file with about half the size of original and it is the most used lossles compresion. EAC is the best for ripping cd's. You can get codec for playing APE files ( monkey's audio ) through winamp, record it with nero etc.
monkey's and tag metadata
I've tried using monkey, but found it unstable (on win2k).
So I've reverted to using .wav files.
The way i see it, it's not worth the bother of compression, with the cost of hard drives diving.
One problem with .wav files is tagging.
If you do a search, there's almost no information on it. However there is space in the file format for the metadata.
A solution to the problem can be found at:
voyetra where you can download an evaluation copy of Audiostation. This is time limited to 20 rips or so, but not time limited for its tag editing function or library management - which is excellent. The tag data is in a proprietry format as standards do not seem to exist.
So, rip with EAC and you can add tags with Audiostation.
I've tried using monkey, but found it unstable (on win2k).
So I've reverted to using .wav files.
The way i see it, it's not worth the bother of compression, with the cost of hard drives diving.
One problem with .wav files is tagging.
If you do a search, there's almost no information on it. However there is space in the file format for the metadata.
A solution to the problem can be found at:
voyetra where you can download an evaluation copy of Audiostation. This is time limited to 20 rips or so, but not time limited for its tag editing function or library management - which is excellent. The tag data is in a proprietry format as standards do not seem to exist.
So, rip with EAC and you can add tags with Audiostation.
FLAC
I decided to try the FLAC compression program that Won
suggested earlier in this thread. It can be found at
http://flac.sourceforge.net/
It is a lossless compression of wave files and also has plugins
for winamp, and other programs. According to the examples on
the above site the average compression for pop music and similar
seems to be slightly above 50%, but better for classical music.
I tried it on two example files, a Beethoven string quartet and
the first act of Wagners Holländer, the latter in unusually bad
1950's sound, which should make lossless compression more
difficult I suppose. In both cases the resulting files were about
36% the size of the original wav. Just as a check, I also converted
the latter one back to wave and made a diff to verify that it
indeed was lossless.
Although harddisks are laughably cheap nowadays as dhaen
remarked, they do have a tendency to fill up. However, I think
this program is especially useful if you want to archive wave
files on CDROM, since uncompressed versions of long files can
easily cause severe defragmentation and thus a big waste of
CDRs.
I decided to try the FLAC compression program that Won
suggested earlier in this thread. It can be found at
http://flac.sourceforge.net/
It is a lossless compression of wave files and also has plugins
for winamp, and other programs. According to the examples on
the above site the average compression for pop music and similar
seems to be slightly above 50%, but better for classical music.
I tried it on two example files, a Beethoven string quartet and
the first act of Wagners Holländer, the latter in unusually bad
1950's sound, which should make lossless compression more
difficult I suppose. In both cases the resulting files were about
36% the size of the original wav. Just as a check, I also converted
the latter one back to wave and made a diff to verify that it
indeed was lossless.
Although harddisks are laughably cheap nowadays as dhaen
remarked, they do have a tendency to fill up. However, I think
this program is especially useful if you want to archive wave
files on CDROM, since uncompressed versions of long files can
easily cause severe defragmentation and thus a big waste of
CDRs.
Mmm, FLACK looks interesting.
But is it stable?
I'm archiving my .wav's to dvd-rw now. Much lower $ per byte than cdr now.
_______________
Regarding soundcards: I'm still experimenting...
But is it stable?
I'm archiving my .wav's to dvd-rw now. Much lower $ per byte than cdr now.
_______________
Regarding soundcards: I'm still experimenting...
dhaen said:
I guess the only way to know if it is stable is to try it out on
your system. I just downloaded it and made some brief tests,
but it seemed to work well un win98 (yes, I hate that crap,
but still run it for various reasons. At least I have a decently
working unix shell for win and some other indispensible stuff
ported).
I've conisdered buying a dvd burner since the prices are
quite good now. Not sure if the discs are that much cheaper
per byte than CDR here in Sweden, though, but it will be less
of a hazzle to pack the right things together on the discs to
minimize lost disk space. Also, making backups seems more
attractive on DVDR than CDR.
flac itself is totally stable. (still don´t know why it shouldn´t)
It has the advantage to be usable on multible plattforms, like PC and Mac...
There are free tagging tools out there. Foobar2000 which is the most powerfull player atm with lots of features or TAG at www.ca5e.tk
This all is better explained at a forum dedicated to computer based audio and much people with very deep knowledge about it.
Visit hydrogenaudio.org to get answers to all your queations!
It has the advantage to be usable on multible plattforms, like PC and Mac...
There are free tagging tools out there. Foobar2000 which is the most powerfull player atm with lots of features or TAG at www.ca5e.tk
This all is better explained at a forum dedicated to computer based audio and much people with very deep knowledge about it.
Visit hydrogenaudio.org to get answers to all your queations!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.