Purité Audio
Trade: Purite Audio
I wonder what percentage of Apple users play uncompressed files.
Keith.
Keith.
'Best' ripping format for CDs
- Thread starter ExtremePie
- Start date
foxwelljsly
Me too, I ate one sour too.
Flac & EAC for PC, apple lossless & iTunes for Mac. WAV and AIFF are for weirdos.
If you're Mac, iTunes and bitperfect will resolve anything your files contain (including seamlessly handling HD audio) whilst being cheap and convenient, but I do get the problem with cataloguing classical recordings - this could do with a fix.
If you're Mac, iTunes and bitperfect will resolve anything your files contain (including seamlessly handling HD audio) whilst being cheap and convenient, but I do get the problem with cataloguing classical recordings - this could do with a fix.
ExtremePie
pfm Member
I can set a profile in dbpoweramp. I'm thinking that modern gets filed under artist, year then album then track. Classical will be under composer. It looks like this is an easy profile thing to set up and the question will be how the new SBT handles it.
Yes, it's going to be a long process, but if it's done once, accurately and lossless then it's worth it.
What do the confidence levels really mean in dbpoweramp does anyone know? They vary from 13 to 69 at the moment, CD to CD.
Yes, it's going to be a long process, but if it's done once, accurately and lossless then it's worth it.
What do the confidence levels really mean in dbpoweramp does anyone know? They vary from 13 to 69 at the moment, CD to CD.
Tony L
Administrator
I suspect a very substantial number - Macs have always been the choice of musos, folks in the arts etc, and tend to have decent sound quality on board. Certainly most folk I know with Macs have a large range of uncompressed music, though by saying that just about everyone I know is either a hi-fi geek, a musician, or both! I suspect Apple have better market coverage in the US as most computer talk over on say Steve Hoffman seems to be Mac-based.
SBT doesn't care much about directory structure - it uses the tags embedded in the rips, unless of course you explicitly browse by directory. But you have some decisions to make about multi-disc sets - note there is an option in LMS about how they are shown and options in dBp. I think the confidence levels are how many other rips have had the same checksum.
surely not - wouldn't most of the content on people's iThings be downloaded from iTunes and hence be very very lossy indeed?
foxwelljsly
Me too, I ate one sour too.
Probably, but a lossless CD rip on an iThing with really good in-ear monitors sounds fantastic.
tomek
pfm Member
Theoretically flac should sound exactly the same as wav, but to my ears wav sounds better, so i converted my whole flac library into waves.
dBpoweramp can do it in a batch mode and all tags will be kept and hd space is so cheap.
Maybe flac decompression process is causing some jitter fluctuation, higher sytem load or whatever, i don't know, it is a mystery for me.
To many people flac/wav sounds the same, but it is probably depending on many factors.
dBpoweramp can do it in a batch mode and all tags will be kept and hd space is so cheap.
Maybe flac decompression process is causing some jitter fluctuation, higher sytem load or whatever, i don't know, it is a mystery for me.
To many people flac/wav sounds the same, but it is probably depending on many factors.
Stunsworth
pfm Member
Well, I do, but I would guess that the majority of people these days listen to compressed audio - Apple or otherwise.
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
Bring back Cassette Tape!
Robert
Tapehead
Probably <1%
Teddy Ray
pfm Member
FLAC is the leading lossless codec. it will remain so.
Get used to it.
macs are absolutely NOT the across the board choice of musos. I am a recording engineer and professional muso since 1998 or so, the systems ive seen have been overwhelmingly PC based. Overwhelmingly. maybe *engineers* use apple because of the pro tools shite but Musicians??? no. the tools for musicians have always been better on PC.
Teddy Ray
pfm Member
Teddy Ray
pfm Member
FLAC conversion is doing nothing to the file. you can compress/decompress 1,000,000 times and in the end , run a checksum/null test. you will have the same thing as you started with.
these things have been thoroughly debunked.
hammeredklavier
owner of two very cheap hi-fis
It certainly could, and it's easy: just play the files in order of filename in the folders the user has created...!
hammeredklavier
owner of two very cheap hi-fis
Credit where it's due, Apple's lossy AAC codec is stellar, at anything over av 128 kbps VBR you'd struggle to pick out the lossless source in a blind listening test.
hammeredklavier
owner of two very cheap hi-fis
True. If you think you're going to hear a difference then you probably will, but it can be demonstrated that it's just your imagination.
canyelles
pfm Member
I don't think I am understanding what you are saying here. Could you expand on this a little? What is the problem you are trying to solve?
I am reading this as 'play the movements of a classical piece in alphabetical order' which is obviously crazy.
hammeredklavier
owner of two very cheap hi-fis
If you rip a CD so that the track number is the first part of the filename then the tracks will play in the right order, provided the software simply allows you to choose which folder you you wish to play and then play the tracks in order of filename. Apple's way tries to guess your albums and organise your music for you by looking at metadata, so I end up with huge playlists of everything by Beethoven, for example, or everything performed by Alfred Brendel. Quite useless. Foobar (on PC) and Sony Walkmans are fine. As is Winamp, although I hate the interface!