PDA

View Full Version : Itunes okay to build library for Sonos and further related?



pwood
12-12-2010, 11:37
Initially I was drawn to the Touch due to its price but seeing how easy the Sonos stuff works and having an iPad I have decided (okay its almost at that stage) to go down ZP90, Zonebridge route.

I have been ripping my CD's to 256vbr AAC for use with an old Nano and my iPad due to HD space. I have a WD My world book sitting unopened which I hope to build a media library in currently have around 500 CD's. I see on other forums a lot a lot of FLAC users using Foobar Mediamonkey etc but having read up on the SQ differences I have come to the conclusion ALC is no different. As i already have iTunes I inted using it to slowly rip my collection.

The questions I have are.
What if anything is wrong with using iTunes

How easy is it to keep the content on my NAS as opposed to the laptops Hard disk when using Sonos kit. This is one main reason the Touch was dropped for my selection as i dont want a laptop on all the time and i need a NAS for other things anyway.

I am asking this here because you guys tend to avoid flaming arguments and fanboy bias tends to be low as well.

WAD62
12-12-2010, 11:54
What NAS do you have?

I run SqueezeCentre (7.3.3) on my QNAP NAS (TS-119 turbo 1.2ghz), and keep my FLAC library there too. 12W when running, 5W when idle.

I then run up to 4 squeezeboxes (via my wi-fi router) from there quite happily.

I preesume you're a MAC user, hence Itunes, otherwise I would suggest dBpoweramp (much more precise ripping) and FLAC, FLAC is platform independent.

Sorry mate but Itunes is the devils software IMHO ;)

Oh and also use winamp on my desktop to play directly from the NAS library too, and even better the Playlists are the same format as SqueezeBox ones, and are therefore interchangeable.

One further thing ReplayGain (both album and track) is a big advantage with FLAC and Squeezebox, Sonos only supports track, and I don't believe apple lossless supports it properly

pwood
12-12-2010, 12:14
Nope Vista User. PC world are selling a Western Digital My Book world edition 1TB NAS for £99 (http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/western-digital-my-book-world-edition-network-hard-drive-1tb-02505172-pdt.html) so i bought one as thats my threshhold for that sort of thing and it has an app that allows my iPad to view all the picture files directly which was a big draw.

I know that squeezecentre can be installed on some NAS drives but they tend to be more complicated and unless pre installed i dont fancy try to install it myself having read instructions and the potential for bricking the unit.

I dont have to use iTunes the reason i was intent on doing so was due to ease of use given it does everything in one go and I already use it. I need something the wife can use without thought as well as I will need help ripping all those discs over the coming months. Another simple solution preferably free would be welcomed.

WAD62
12-12-2010, 12:44
Hi Paul,

You're quite right there are NAS's and NAS's, my QNAP is essentially a 1.2ghz linux server, and I wouldn't recommend anything less to run SqueezeServer on particularly if you want to add additional devices, or run large playlists.

And I'll be honest it could get a little fiddly if you're not heavily into IT, I run RAID 1 synchronisation for disaster recovery, particularly for the server build...etc. As you can see it can get a bit out of hand!!!

Tranquil make a really nice efficient windows based server, which is more user friendly, but then you're talking daft money (about £400 with 1Tb).

I'd thoroughly recommend dBpoweramp for ripping, and any other conversion requirements, there's a 21 day free trial I think, and you can do quite a bit in three weeks. The full version's under £30, but that does give access to 5 tag databases, and additional CRC validation, and if configured correctly it is very good.

Use FLAC as there are several advantages, the biggest of these are the ReplayGain attributes, with apple one has to 'remaster' the track to a different volume, which can be destructive, with FLAC it simply uses that value at playback should you wish to use it.

I started off by using Winamp as my client, and still do on any of my computers, just link to the network drive as your library and you are away. My Missus has no problem using winamp, there are more configuration options but once they're set there's no problem.

Oh and it has a new feature on the pro version (£11 for multiple installations), ReplayGain pre-amp, something that not even SqueezeBoxes have.

I didn't buy any SqueezeBox stuff until I'd convinced myself that this was the way I wanted to listen to music. As long as you rip your collection to FLAC you can use that library in whatever client configuration you choose in the future. Squeezebox, Sonos, Linn, Winamp etc.

Both the SqueezeBox server and Winamp can happily share the same NAS library.

I use an Android phone, so I just copy music (I keep an mp3 VBR version of my FLAC for mobile purposes) onto it's SD card as and when I want to, without any fannying around with synchronisation.

FLAC support on android is coming soon, winamp is already available, as is SqueezeCommander.

Stratmangler
12-12-2010, 12:54
First things first - you're ripping to a lossy format. Why ?

You've got a choice of ALAC (Apple Lossless), FLAC and APE to play with, and these formats can all be decompressed to their original pre compressed state.

As you already use iTunes then ALAC is the natural and obvious choice.

Have you performed secure rip ?
If not, why not ? The option to do so is there in iTunes, and if you're going to rip a collection then do it once - properly - and have a backup or two of the entire lot so that if your drive goes belly up you haven't lost everything.
And keep those backups up to date.


This business about reading up :eek: on SQ - have you ripped to the various formats (MP3, AAC & ALAC) and listened to the results ?
I don't think you'd have settled on AAC @ 256kbps if you had.

WAD62
12-12-2010, 13:24
...at the risk of repeating myself

FLAC,FLAC,FLAC,FLAC!!!!!

Don't use a propriety format, or you'll be stuck with apple forever

pwood
12-12-2010, 13:25
Stratmangler I think you have misunderstood. part of my post The only reason I ripped to 256vbr was due having a small HD in my last laptop and had no need of lossless audio or any idea i would until now. The SQ between the two is clear to me as well and now realize that I should have bought an itunes compatible NAS years ago but didnt due the prices of such things then. Misunderstanding aside are you saying that ripping to ALAC would suffice given all i need is album/artist in the main. Secure RIP is not something I was aware of so thanks for adding that bit in your post. Please confirm what it does over standard rip.

WAD62 ...REPLAY GAIN attributes:scratch: what is that and why would I need it.

pwood
12-12-2010, 13:32
...at the risk of repeating myself

FLAC,FLAC,FLAC,FLAC!!!!!

Don't use a propriety format, or you'll be stuck with apple forever

I would then have to convert them to AAC for iTunes. Am I right in assuming that DBPoweramp can do this at the same time?

Lots of questions i know thanks for being patient.

twelvebears
12-12-2010, 13:39
...at the risk of repeating myself

FLAC,FLAC,FLAC,FLAC!!!!!

Don't use a propriety format, or you'll be stuck with apple forever

Well that's not completely true is it? You can always convert from one lossless format to another whenever you like.

Also the matter of Apple being evil is a matter of opinion. Yes Steve Jobs is a bit of a cock-monkey for NOT building FLAC compatibility into iTunes, and has hamstrung things like Apple TV with similar 'blindness' to popular file formats, BUT as a pure music library management tool, iTunes is very user friendly and works just fine.

Obviously it depends what your level of technical knowledge is and how much 'twiddling' you want to do, but I have used iTunes to build and manage a completely lossless ALAC collection of 450Gb without having felt like fire-bombing Apple out of frustration.

Apple aren't the be-all, end-all but they aren't all bad.

WAD62
12-12-2010, 13:51
ReplayGain; please refer to this link for chapter and verse

http://replaygain.hydrogenaudio.org/

One of the great thing about having a digitised collection is that one can quickly assemble a nice big random play playlist of several thousand tracks, and have a nice crossfade between them. However as you will know some albums are louder than others, in my collection the variance is about 20dB between the loudest and quietest.

So without replaygain one is constantly running to the volume control...

However help is at hand

With FLAC comes a whole set of tag attributes (track name, artist,album artist etc.), as with mp3, two of which are 'Track Gain' & 'Album gain' (known as audiophile gain).

these attributes can be generated by several programs, winamp (which I use), dBpoweramp, foobar, media monkey etc. They use an algorithm to identify the relative volume of the Album & track based on an arbitrary average.

Album gain; applies the same value to all tracks on an album, i.e. takes the whole album up or down N dB.

Track gain (more for DJs, and radio); applies a specific value to each track, which is rubbish for album playback, as quieter tracks are bumped up relative to the louder tracks.

To do this with apple requires that the track is re-mastered!!!!! I had to help my mate do this in his bar, and the concept disgusts me...sorry I have a problem with apple and Itunes in particular...must learn to control my IT snobbery!!! :doh:

Obviously one feature of using ReplayGain is that overall the volume will be down by about 6dB on average, which is not too much of a problem if your amps are beefy enough. However Winamp has an new replaygain preamp which enables you to add +6dB, and therefore we're getting closer to the original volume.

My loudest album -12.92dB, and my quietest is +6.61dB

And you can turn this feature off and on at playback, without any issue, or remastering required.

I hope this makes sense, the web link will tell it more eloquently than I ever could.

Stratmangler
12-12-2010, 13:52
Ripping to ALAC is way, way better than any lossy format, but I'm with Will on this one, in that it is a proprietary format, and as such I don't use it either.

I rip everything to FLAC using dBpoweramp, although I have used EAC and still have it on my machines.

The secure ripping business means that the ripping machine has compared the data and finalised a result (ie it has managed to get a section of data to read the same way twice in succession).
On damaged CDs it may not be possible to recover the data in a couple of spots and have an accurate comparison, so the result ends up being insecure.
You might not hear anything wrong with an insecure rip, but usually you'd get pops, bangs, dropouts and what have you, so the result is not satisfactory.

Personally I'd use EAC to rip to FLAC if you want a free solution.
And tidy up the tags with Mp3tag.

The replaygain thing is where you can have the output levels of your music collection read and noted against tracks/albums - if you play a totally random selection of music the level will sometimes change dramatically from track to track - using replaygain settings will stop the need to get to the volume control and adjust things quickly, thus saving your ears and equipment from unnecessary pain.
The tags do not affect the music itself. They are read by the player.
Squeezebox Server can use replaygain tags, as can Foobar2000.

Foobar2000 is also a good free tool to have - you can use it to scan for replaygain.

pwood
12-12-2010, 14:00
Thanks stratmangler,

I am annoyed that I did not have the foresight to rip to ALAC in the first place and then use iTunes to downconvert to the nano and iPad as I would have a deent starter library already.

If I were to use iTunes I would still need a converter for any high res Flac files I may download.

WAD62
12-12-2010, 14:05
I would then have to convert them to AAC for iTunes. Am I right in assuming that DBPoweramp can do this at the same time?

Lots of questions i know thanks for being patient.

It's really worth having dBpoweramp for that reason...

Don't worry mate it took lots of forum trawling and trial and error before I settled on this err...'process'

WAD62
12-12-2010, 14:06
Thanks stratmangler,

I am annoyed that I did not have the foresight to rip to ALAC in the first place and then use iTunes to downconvert to the nano and iPad as I would have a deent starter library already.

If I were to use iTunes I would still need a converter for any high res Flac files I may download.

Did you get the ReplayGain link from my other post?

pwood
12-12-2010, 14:23
Sorry Will i was distracted by a small furry kitten who was thundering about the living room and missed that post initially. Please accept my belated thanks for the clarification.

WAD62
12-12-2010, 14:30
Sorry Will i was distracted by a small furry kitten who was thundering about the living room and missed that post initially. Please accept my belated thanks for the clarification.

No problem mate, I'm suffering a similar feline assault at the moment, it's 'Chunk Time', and he tends to stick his claws in my leg just to remind me!!!!! Aaaarrrgghh!

I must admit I do bang on about ReplayGain a bit, it all depends on your listening habits, I love hearing tracks in a different context (obviously concept albums need not apply), if you don't want to use random mixing or playlists then it is a little pointless...:)

It's beer o'clock :cool:

pwood
12-12-2010, 14:52
Bit early for that Sir but i like your thinking:cool:

Sketchy
12-12-2010, 15:26
I convert all mine to .wav

takes up more space than flac but is supported on more devices.

or prior to this 320kb mp3's just for the support base, nothing worse than having a great version of a great track and only being able to play in on some devices.

also with all digital media I cannot stress how important back up's are.

keep at least 2 back ups of everything and when you get a larger library that can be a pain.

I use 2 iSCSI drobo Elite's as file dumps, one simply copies everything of the other, both controlled by a rackmount server.

they are very cool bits of kit, can survive 2 drive failures at the same time, can work with any sata drive, can be expanded live on the fly and have the copy feature included in the dashboard software, just set it up and away it goes.

12.5 TB of data that could be expanded to 18TB using 3TB drives and even higher when larger space single drives are available.

you dont own your data unless you have 3 copies of it, said someone much smarter than me once.

webby
12-12-2010, 16:29
I use a mac, so I use iTunes, and i have no problems with sound quality. I rip to alac using xld which uses accurate rip, although I don't use replay gain. My alac library is around 150gb and it's backed up to a WD MyBook 1tb drive (not NAS).

I am also thinking of adding a Sonos unit in another room. Apparently, the advantage of using a NAS drive is that your music is accessible even when your computer is off or in sleep mode. However, i think i'd rather just change the sleep settings on my mac.

Let us know how you get on with the Sonos when you get it.

trailer
12-12-2010, 16:41
Why not rip to AIFF in iTunes?

pwood
12-12-2010, 16:59
ALAC or AIFF? Whilst the later is in theory better the former uses less space and being lossless no loss in SQ. Have I got that right?

trailer
12-12-2010, 17:05
Less space yes. There are those who say they can hear a difference between wavs and FLACs. Even though it ALAC and FLAC are lossless they're still compressed. I'm guessing that they some processing power is used to uncompress them at the player end?

trailer
12-12-2010, 17:14
I don't know how many CD's you have but it will take a fair few to fill a 1Tb disc.

One thing I have found using a Sonos set up with iTunes files is missing artwork. Sonos doesn't have the ability to add artwork itself and looks for embedded artwork. This should be done by iTunes but it isn't perfect.

WAD62
12-12-2010, 22:43
ALAC or AIFF? Whilst the later is in theory better the former uses less space and being lossless no loss in SQ. Have I got that right?

I'm guessing that ALAC is apple's attempt at copying FLAC, why are you chaps so keen on apple's proprietary formats, or windows for that matter?

FLAC is Free Lossless Audio Codec, and belongs to the people...cue citizen smith music!!!;)

FLAC can be decompressed with relative ease by a squeezebox player (or any other FLAC compatible network player), particularly if it's bog standard 16bit/44.1k, there are some threads around about 24/96 issues but I have no experience there.

I have meticulously compared the sound of of my squeezebox playing FLAC into my audiolab 8000DAX, and the same track on CD from my 8000CDM transport into the same DAC, there is no difference...I actually was hoping the FLAC would be better as there's less chance of errors, but the CDM is a top notch transport.

If you use FLAC at the default compression (level 5) you will need about 300 Mb per CD...

pwood
18-12-2010, 18:49
Decided to get Sonos after much debate with my wallet;). I have read a bit more and it seems album art will not appear on my Sonos menus unless I manually copy and paste a picture into each file album in iTunes. seems iTunes creates a further folder for the album art it has which Sonos doesn't see. So on that basis it looks like I will be having to rip twice once to FLAC and once to Apple Lossless. Or just live without the pictures for the stuff already ripped which is no biggie as I would rip it again to lossless this time and for new ones a quick copy and paste from Amazon or similar.

If I use the likes of dBpoweramp to rip the Files to Applelossless will it do all the tagging and album art adding itself? All my discs are in good condition and scratch free so do I need to pay for DBpoweramp full version. The reason I ask is I would be likely to rip to FLAC and Applelossless at the same time and I think the free version won't do that.

Is there a way of automatically updating iTunes when ripping a disc using another program? Like I said before questions a plenty from this ripping newbie.

WAD62
18-12-2010, 20:44
Decided to get Sonos after much debate with my wallet;). I have read a bit more and it seems album art will not appear on my Sonos menus unless I manually copy and paste a picture into each file album in iTunes. seems iTunes creates a further folder for the album art it has which Sonos doesn't see. So on that basis it looks like I will be having to rip twice once to FLAC and once to Apple Lossless. Or just live without the pictures for the stuff already ripped which is no biggie as I would rip it again to lossless this time and for new ones a quick copy and paste from Amazon or similar.

If I use the likes of dBpoweramp to rip the Files to Applelossless will it do all the tagging and album art adding itself? All my discs are in good condition and scratch free so do I need to pay for DBpoweramp full version. The reason I ask is I would be likely to rip to FLAC and Applelossless at the same time and I think the free version won't do that.

Is there a way of automatically updating iTunes when ripping a disc using another program? Like I said before questions a plenty from this ripping newbie.

With regard to dBpoweramp there's no functional difference between the free and the purchased apart from tag info, you can rip to any given format, and then subsequently do a batch conversion of your original rip, to another format, not in parallel...

pwood
18-12-2010, 22:11
Will, thanks again. I don't see me needing much more than album & artist info anyway so DB Looks the way to go and with FLAC :cool:

pwood
23-12-2010, 00:52
Got my Sonos up and running yesterday and mainly played around with Last.FM and radio. Downloaded DB and ripped 5 discs then noted it was not set to secure which slowed things only slightly. I have 20 FLAC albums now. Not sure the best way to add to my NAs other than drag and drop from my music folder but it works well enough. The odd album art is not displaying on the Sonos iPad controller or pc but as far as I can tell have all been ripped the same way:scratch:

one FLAC won't play stating unsupported format. it was freebee high res one from an unknown artist so it may be the file resolution as it's hard for me to tell. I thought Sonos zp90 would play high resolution Flacs for some reason I did anyway but google so far is telling me it's not possible. Sonos was setup with a cheap QED analogue digital cable into my ONKYO 875 as it was already plugged into my CD player (sound poor out the Arcam CD73) to my surprise the Sonos sounds brilliant so well happy. will try the phono output soon to compare DACs.

webby
23-12-2010, 19:21
Nice one Paul. It's dead easy to add your own artwork to iTunes. I can recommend album art exchange for high quality artwork.

webby
26-12-2010, 13:24
With regards to your album art; see here https://sonos.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/sonos.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=547

I don't think you need to rip twice.

Stratmangler
26-12-2010, 13:34
one FLAC won't play stating unsupported format. it was freebee high res one from an unknown artist so it may be the file resolution as it's hard for me to tell. I thought Sonos zp90 would play high resolution Flacs for some reason I did anyway but google so far is telling me it's not possible. Sonos was setup with a cheap QED analogue digital cable into my ONKYO 875 as it was already plugged into my CD player (sound poor out the Arcam CD73) to my surprise the Sonos sounds brilliant so well happy. will try the phono output soon to compare DACs.

I had a dig around to see what formats the Sonos does support, and it looks like it does not support hi-res stuff, which I find surprising.:scratch:

Maybe it accounts for the dependability claims by Sonos owners, after all, if your player cannot play 24/96 files on network then you do not tax the network either.

pwood
26-12-2010, 17:13
Whilst I am annoyed that it won't play hi res files at the moment tbh the stuff available is not really my scene. I can't see main stream music being avail for copy right reasons, file transfer issues and let's be honest who apart from us enthusiasts really care in a world of 128kb :steam:

Sonos is indeed faster than my cd player in all respects and at FLAC it never stutters unless the rip is at fault.

webby
29-12-2010, 14:11
I've just this minute ordered a Sonos S5 Starter pack from amazon. £359.99 with 10% off!

Jonboy
29-12-2010, 16:33
has anybody had trouble with some cd's not ripping, they either come out with a load of distortion on itunes or won't rip on Db poweramp without going into some re-rip that will take days to do, these are new cds the two i remember having trouble with is Poalo Nutini and Damien Rice, but have had others as well, is their some sort of copy protection on them, i think media player won't rip them either :scratch:

WAD62
29-12-2010, 17:29
has anybody had trouble with some cd's not ripping, they either come out with a load of distortion on itunes or won't rip on Db poweramp without going into some re-rip that will take days to do, these are new cds the two i remember having trouble with is Poalo Nutini and Damien Rice, but have had others as well, is their some sort of copy protection on them, i think media player won't rip them either :scratch:

Hi Jon,

Yes quite a few out of 2.5k, mostly from mid to late '90s, some chonky rip protection...misplaced sectors and chains.

Easily solved by doing a copy of the disc via Roxio or something similar, then try ripping the copy, things should be OK.

If that doesn't work I'd suggest you may need to use a better CD drive, it's worth it just for the extra speed and accuracy anyway.

N.B. It's not worth having any rip that wasn't acquired by the secure rip process.

Jac Hawk
29-12-2010, 17:36
it's simple as far as software goes.
dvpoweramp to rip and media player 12 to play ohh and if you have an ipod you need the mgtek dopisp so your ipod will link up to media player.

Jonboy
29-12-2010, 17:44
Cheers Will/Mike, i will give it a go, i have Nero on my office computer i'll give it a go on that, i did wonder whether that would do it

WAD62
29-12-2010, 18:00
it's simple as far as software goes.
dvpoweramp to rip and media player 12 to play ohh and if you have an ipod you need the mgtek dopisp so your ipod will link up to media player.

Or use an android phone with winamp, which syncs to the latest version of winamp on your PC.

Winamp is vastly superior to media player IMHO

Jac Hawk
29-12-2010, 22:18
Or use an android phone with winamp, which syncs to the latest version of winamp on your PC.

Winamp is vastly superior to media player IMHO
I think it depends on what you're used to. I started out with media player and haved used it ever since, i don't think there can be any sonic difference between the two, so i can't see how one can be better than the other, i suppose it's all down to features and ease of use, i know loads of people who happily use iTunes cos thats what they're used to, like i said i like media player, and the way that if you can't do something on it, like syncing your ipod, you can bet that there is a plug-in that will allow it to be done.

In the end it's all down to what is easiest for you to use, while allowing you to do with it what you want.

WAD62
30-12-2010, 10:56
I think it depends on what you're used to. I started out with media player and haved used it ever since, i don't think there can be any sonic difference between the two, so i can't see how one can be better than the other, i suppose it's all down to features and ease of use, i know loads of people who happily use iTunes cos thats what they're used to, like i said i like media player, and the way that if you can't do something on it, like syncing your ipod, you can bet that there is a plug-in that will allow it to be done.

In the end it's all down to what is easiest for you to use, while allowing you to do with it what you want.

Good points well made...it all depends on ones requirements and context.

I'm not suggesting that there's any sonic difference, but as I'm using my squeezebox FLAC library as my source I can do a few more things with winamp, and there's some additional functionality that is complementary to squeezebox, which I don't believe WMP supports (please advise me if I'm talking rubbish here).

ReplayGain, both track and album, can be generated by, and are supported in winamp. In the pro edition it also provides a unique feature of 'ReplayGain Pre-amp', which is very good.

The playlists generated within winamp can be used by squeezebox as they are of the same format (.m3u).

And finally the clincher for me is that I can now run winamp as my player of choice on my android phone, which can sync with/control the pc based version. Whilst also running squeezecommander on the same phone to control and sync with my squeezebox server/players.

One small issue at the moment is FLAC support on Android, but that's on the way.

Jac Hawk
30-12-2010, 13:24
Well i gave winamp a go, Will seems to be very passionate about it so i thought what the hell, if i don't like it i can go back to WMP. Anyway i can see how it can be useful, the android link up i especially like, i don't have an android phone, but i pressganged by brother into comming over, the prommise of a few glasses of single malt was the clincher i think, he has a new HTC phone that has android on it, it was easy to sync and set up etc, my only problem was memory size on the HTC, you see i have about 1Tb of music on my PC so syncing with it is impossible if i want everything, it impossible with my ipod too, however the ipod has much more storage than the HTC, it does support scrobbling on last fm though which i found very handy.

As for the rest of winamp, it does have many pre installed features that WMP doesn't have and need to be down loaded as a plug-in, some of which are free but others and most noticably the ipod sync plugin has to be bought from MGTEK. Winamp does support a greater number of file extensions than WMP, but i would imagine that is only really useful if you download a lot of pirate media in differing formats, and to be honnest i haven't found file extensions to be a problem.

Both Winamp and WMP allow you to rip and burn CD's, however WMP only allows you to rip into **.wma or **.wav formats, so if like me you chose to use flac then you will need to use another program to rip your CD's.

In the end i will stick to what i said in an earlier post, which is that it depends on the look and feel of the product, for me if i hadnt have used WMP for such a long time and gotten used to it and how it works, i would probably go for Winamp, as it doesn't need you to download as many plug-ins to allow you to do what you want with it, however with this increased functionality out of the box as it were, also comes increased complication when using it, and i found WMP a lot easier to work and understand and then add the extra functionality as you need it.

Like i said it's a personal choice, and for a change with HiFi it doesn't boil down to sonic superiorority, and rather what you like the look of best, if i was just getting into using my PC as a music storage and playback device i would run them side by side for a while and then make a choice.

WAD62
30-12-2010, 13:36
I think the real clincher is if you are using ReplayGain, otherwise the difference is minimal as you rightly say...

As for ripping I think we both agree that dBpoweramp is the boy :)

RE. the Android phone (HTC desire), for me the syncing aspect is irrelevant as one simply drags and drops music directories into a folder on the micro SD (16Gb, the 32Gb will be cheap enough soon), if you connect it as an external drive. It then indexes everything when one disconnects the phone.

I keep a VBR MP3 copy of my FLAC collection, generated by dBpoweramp batch converter, for this reason.

Increases in storage and FLAC capability will be here soon enough...I hope :cool:

Steve H
02-01-2011, 22:00
I've come to this thread a bit late in the day but here's a link to an article which formulates an approach to ripping and maintaining digital files. From it, I ended up with the approach of using dbPoweramp, ripping to FLAC for an open source archive copy and ALAC for playback.

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Computer-Audiophile-CD-Ripping-Strategy-and-Methodology

Steve

WAD62
03-01-2011, 10:45
I've come to this thread a bit late in the day but here's a link to an article which formulates an approach to ripping and maintaining digital files. From it, I ended up with the approach of using dbPoweramp, ripping to FLAC for an open source archive copy and ALAC for playback.

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Computer-Audiophile-CD-Ripping-Strategy-and-Methodology

Steve

Why not just playback FLAC and simplify the entire process... :)

Steve H
03-01-2011, 15:21
....because I'm preparing to use iTunes with Pure Music on a dedicated Mac Mini for audio playback (http://www.mach2music.com/)

On my work laptop, I have VLC and FLAC files but that doesn't get anywhere near my home system :)

Steve

WAD62
03-01-2011, 18:49
You're going to buy this...???

"Our Introductory Price is $1495.00 which includes the shipping to your door (Within the U.S.). When paired with a quality DAC, this setup will outperform CD or SACD players at 2-4 times its price. The sound quality is that good. Some people are even using the Mach2 without a DAC and finding very good results."

...1500 bucks for a server!!! without a quality DAC!!! :stalks:

Jac Hawk
03-01-2011, 19:07
You're going to buy this...???

"Our Introductory Price is $1495.00 which includes the shipping to your door (Within the U.S.). When paired with a quality DAC, this setup will outperform CD or SACD players at 2-4 times its price. The sound quality is that good. Some people are even using the Mach2 without a DAC and finding very good results."

...1500 bucks for a server!!! without a quality DAC!!! :stalks:

I'm with you mate :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: a lot of cash plus i would like to see some independant tests, it's all well and good the company that makes it saying it's the dogs bollocks, they would...

Reid Malenfant
03-01-2011, 19:36
...1500 bucks for a server!!! without a quality DAC!!! :stalks:
If i'm correct then Steve has a top quality DAC :)

dCS, the same kit i should be getting delivered on Wednesday hopefully :cool:

WAD62
03-01-2011, 20:26
If i'm correct then Steve has a top quality DAC :)

dCS, the same kit i should be getting delivered on Wednesday hopefully :cool:

Ok...

...1500 bucks for a server!!! :stalks: ;)

Or is there more to it than that?

Reid Malenfant
03-01-2011, 20:31
Well i know little about them, but more about the dCS kit :eyebrows: Maybe he knows what he's doing ;)

Jac Hawk
03-01-2011, 23:41
Well i know little about them, but more about the dCS kit :eyebrows: Maybe he knows what he's doing ;)

Im with Will mate $1500 for a server is a lot of money, now i'm not arguing that there may be some sonic benifits to be gained from this bit of kit, and what the maufacturer will show you is how much better it is on a scope, but in the real world what looks like a big difference on a scope may be almost unnoticable to your ears, plus did you notice in there advert, no reviews, no independent people named, saying how great it is, to me it looks like the emperors new clothes. Another expensive gadget that may or may not work

WAD62
04-01-2011, 11:36
Well i know little about them, but more about the dCS kit :eyebrows: Maybe he knows what he's doing ;)

I wasn't making any reference to the dCS kit, it looks like very nice stuff, but I'm sure it has no specific dependency on the Mach2Music server.

From a quick look at the Mach2Music overview it would appear to be a dedicated non network enabled music server. So it can only feed into one system/DAC via a hardwired USB or firewire link, hence all of the RF shielding and expensive cables, check out the accessories. And were also therefore back into the world of Synchronous V Asnchronous USB DACs.

Using wi-fi streaming from a network enabled server, to a network enabled player, and then into a DAC will achieve better 'isolation', with the flexibility of additional players, at a significantly lower price.

But would not be so user friendly, or pretty...;)

Reid Malenfant
04-01-2011, 13:23
Hey i put my hands up in the air & surrender :lolsign:

I know diddly squat about streaming audio or servers come to that :) I'm just assuming that a bloke that has £12,000 of equipment might know what he's doing in the way of feeding it :confused:

:ner: :eyebrows:

WAD62
04-01-2011, 13:28
Hey i put my hands up in the air & surrender :lolsign:

I know diddly squat about streaming audio or servers come to that :) I'm just assuming that a bloke that has £12,000 of equipment might know what he's doing in the way of feeding it :confused:

:ner: :eyebrows:

Not disagreeing, I'm just curious as to what the benefits are of such an expensive, dedicated server/player.

It's always good to learn... :) :ner::ner::ner:

Steve H
04-01-2011, 23:11
Surprised to cause such comment....

I don't see it as bad value - cost of a new Mac Mini, RAM upgrade, SSD drive, FireWire enclosure for original drive plus optimisation of operating system and installation of my choice of music player - Pure Music. Yes, I could certainly do the hardware and Pure Music side of it but the OS work would be trial and error for me. I spend a lot of time travelling so weekends are precious and worth preserving for family and listening to music.

What am I really buying? I heard one of these in New Jersey last year and, compared to my Thinkpad T60 playing lossless files via iTunes, it was a joy. You can find user comments and support for it on Audio Circle, too.

I'm afraid I'm out of step here as I don't believe that "all bits are equal". I do believe that EMI, RFI and mechanical noise can corrupt or distort audio signals. I also believe that some cables, analogue and digital, sound different to others. And I even believe that not all transports are created equal. Add to that my belief that computers are noisy and, at the software level, too much subject to undesirable "interaction", unsolicited grabbing of CPU, etc. I saw a comment about asynchronous USB which suggested that it is not accepted here but..... I believe in that, too.

Given all that, to get properly into computer audio, I want an integrated library manager and player. iTunes and Pure Music are that. I want a reliable process for ripping and tagging with embedded album art plus an open source archive to save me doing it all again and a copy to play natively in the player of choice. dbPoweramp provide that. Then, I want a dedicated computer that will not run anti virus software, that will generate the minimum of electro mechanical noise, that will not have bits of unwanted software running in background and will run reliably for a long time to come. And I don't want to spend any time keeping it working. All I want to do is add files to the library and listen to them with my family.

I hope that explains it a bit. I don't expect to convert people to this. It's just my approach to maintaining high quality sound and ease of use.

Sorry to bang on so long,
Steve

pwood
05-01-2011, 15:34
Hmm the "other related bit" in the thread title is moving things away from the thread idea a tad methinks.

I have settled on DBPOWER AMP and its seems pretty straightforward and using 5 databases it finds album iTunes can't and won't.

Jac Hawk
07-01-2011, 21:12
Hmm the "other related bit" in the thread title is moving things away from the thread idea a tad methinks.

I have settled on DBPOWER AMP and its seems pretty straightforward and using 5 databases it finds album iTunes can't and won't.

Sweet :) and in my opinion it's a great program

WAD62
08-01-2011, 13:41
Surprised to cause such comment....

I don't see it as bad value - cost of a new Mac Mini, RAM upgrade, SSD drive, FireWire enclosure for original drive plus optimisation of operating system and installation of my choice of music player - Pure Music. Yes, I could certainly do the hardware and Pure Music side of it but the OS work would be trial and error for me. I spend a lot of time travelling so weekends are precious and worth preserving for family and listening to music.

What am I really buying? I heard one of these in New Jersey last year and, compared to my Thinkpad T60 playing lossless files via iTunes, it was a joy. You can find user comments and support for it on Audio Circle, too.

I'm afraid I'm out of step here as I don't believe that "all bits are equal". I do believe that EMI, RFI and mechanical noise can corrupt or distort audio signals. I also believe that some cables, analogue and digital, sound different to others. And I even believe that not all transports are created equal. Add to that my belief that computers are noisy and, at the software level, too much subject to undesirable "interaction", unsolicited grabbing of CPU, etc. I saw a comment about asynchronous USB which suggested that it is not accepted here but..... I believe in that, too.

Given all that, to get properly into computer audio, I want an integrated library manager and player. iTunes and Pure Music are that. I want a reliable process for ripping and tagging with embedded album art plus an open source archive to save me doing it all again and a copy to play natively in the player of choice. dbPoweramp provide that. Then, I want a dedicated computer that will not run anti virus software, that will generate the minimum of electro mechanical noise, that will not have bits of unwanted software running in background and will run reliably for a long time to come. And I don't want to spend any time keeping it working. All I want to do is add files to the library and listen to them with my family.

I hope that explains it a bit. I don't expect to convert people to this. It's just my approach to maintaining high quality sound and ease of use.

Sorry to bang on so long,
Steve

Hi Steve,

I use a linux based QNAP TS-119 server for very similar reasons (silent, very reliable, and virus immune), and I certainly do believe in the benefits of asynchronous, hence I use network players (squeezebox).

However I'd only advocate using a linux server and network players if you're fairly up on IT, so I can see where you're coming from.

Hope you enjoy the new server :)

:cool: