CDs as Wave Files

[braxus]

Im getting a Rotel music server possibly late in the year or next year. It allows you to hook up an external hard drive to access digital music. Anyway if I buy a 2 TB or 3 TB external USB hard drive, how many CDs can I fit on each drive when converting to WAV files? This would include 650MB and 700MB CDs.

[Lowtone]

650 MB = 74 minutes
so it depends of the lenght of the CD

If you don't mind lossless compression you can have more files with Flac.

[Pentium100]

Im getting a Rotel music server possibly late in the year or next year. It allows you to hook up an external hard drive to access digital music. Anyway if I buy a 2 TB or 3 TB external USB hard drive, how many CDs can I fit on each drive when converting to WAV files? This would include 650MB and 700MB CDs.

3TB would fit about 4700 hours of CD quality uncompressed PCM. You culd use flac to double that.

[Rat44]

I use FLAC also.
You would have to have super hearing to tell the difference.

[Pentium100]

I use FLAC also.
You would have to have super hearing to tell the difference.

No, you would have to delude yourself to tell the difference. The bitstream that you get after decoding flac is identical to the original bitstream. The same way, if you rar a document and then unrar it, you get the same exact document (or do you also think that some words change after rar/unrar?).

[Rat44]

I can't tell the difference but some claim they can.

[Warped Bezel]

I've been ripping CDs to WAV files for a few years. If you want the easiest way to compile them as CDA later, WAV files are not only it but you'll never need to use anything more the Windows Media Player to play them...even Sound Recorder will deal with them.

With that many terabytes available to you...mein gott!

No worries!

[Arnold_Layne]

Wav files do not allow for tagging. FLAC would be ideal. Lossless compression, and you can add tagging (artist/title/album info/album cover/genre etc).

The only way a FLAC file would sound different than a Wav file would be if Jitter was involved. Jitter is not a factor with modern hard drives and CPU's. They are more than fast enough to keep the data flowing.

A_L

[Warped Bezel]

Wav files do not allow for tagging. FLAC would be ideal. Lossless compression, and you can add tagging (artist/title/album info/album cover/genre etc).

The only way a FLAC file would sound different than a Wav file would be if Jitter was involved. Jitter is not a factor with modern hard drives and CPU's. They are more than fast enough to keep the data flowing.

A_L

Windows Media Player searches for that and ususally associates all that. You can also search a database and find the most likely album it came from and fix that.

By the time it gets to any vehicle of mine I don't need to read what it is anyhow, as in Na na na na na na na na na na na YOU'RE GONNA CRASH.

That would be like Forty Miles Of Bad Road, wouldn't it?

[braxus]

The Rotel doesn't support FLAC files. This is why I was asking about WAV files. How many CDs would 4700 hours be? Or even how many CDs would fit onto a 2TB drive?

[tcp100]

I can't tell the difference but some claim they can.

Those people are idiots, and so wrong it hurts.

FLAC is a lossless codec. Period.

The original binary waveform can be reproduced from a FLAC file. As Pentium100 said, it's like using zip or WinRAR on a .wav file.

You can take the original .WAV or RIFF waveform, and the FLAC uncompressed output, and compare them bit-for-bit, and they'd be identical.

That's the nice thing about digital. There is no argument. A 1 is a 1, and a 0 is a 0.

If someone says they "don't like how FLAC sounds", then they're probably the same type who pays $5000 for a power cord for their equipment - not understanding that the same cord connects to tens of yards of 69c/ft Romex in their walls.

There are a lot of nits and finer points about being an audiophile, but some of it is just stupid.

[tcp100]

The Rotel doesn't support FLAC files. This is why I was asking about WAV files. How many CDs would 4700 hours be? Or even how many CDs would fit onto a 2TB drive?

As someone else mentioned, that depends on the CD.

A 74 minute CD is 650mb. An 80mb CD is 700mb, as mentioned earlier.

After that it's simple math, but not all CDs will use the full length available.

Two terabytes is 2048gb, or 2097152mb.

At very least, you could fit:

2097152 / 650 = 3226 650mb 74-minute CDs; maybe take off 1-2% for filesystem overhead.

2097152 / 700 = 2995 700mb 80-minute CDs.

Of course, that's worst case - not even close to all CDs will max that out.

So, the answer is, "About three thousand or so, maybe more."

[tcp100]

Wav files do not allow for tagging. FLAC would be ideal. Lossless compression, and you can add tagging (artist/title/album info/album cover/genre etc).

The only way a FLAC file would sound different than a Wav file would be if Jitter was involved. Jitter is not a factor with modern hard drives and CPU's. They are more than fast enough to keep the data flowing.

A_L

Programs like dbPowerAmp ($38, highly recommended) can both A) correct and compensate for Jitter, and B) verify the accuracy of the rip by comparing a CRC to a known database. As someone who just ripped 100 CDs last week, the AccurateRip database works very well; 95% of my discs matched exactly - the ones that didn't had some damage.

dbPowerAmp and FLAC can also decode HDCD for 20-bit resolution in FLAC.

Jitter, BTW, is highly over exaggerated as affecting CD sound. As mentioned, jitter is rarely an issue in modern equipment. Ripping to FLAC, I don't think I've ever seen a rip that had any detected jitter at all, and thats using a cheap $50 DVD/CD drive on my desktop.

[Arnold_Layne]

Programs like dbPowerAmp ($38, highly recommended) can both A) correct and compensate for Jitter, and B) verify the accuracy of the rip by comparing a CRC to a known database. As someone who just ripped 100 CDs last week, the AccurateRip database works very well; 95% of my discs matched exactly - the ones that didn't had some damage.

dbPowerAmp and FLAC can also decode HDCD for 20-bit resolution in FLAC.

Jitter, BTW, is highly over exaggerated as affecting CD sound. As mentioned, jitter is rarely an issue in modern equipment. Ripping to FLAC, I don't think I've ever seen a rip that had any detected jitter at all, and thats using a cheap $50 DVD/CD drive on my desktop.

I use dbpoweramp myself. Another great advantage is you can rip to more than one codec at the same time. For example, I can rip a CD to FLAC and ALAC at the same time and even store the files on separate hard drives during the rip. :) THis way I can have ALAC for my ipod (connected to my Alpine car stereo) and FLAC for other uses at home.

A_L

[braxus]

3000 CDs! Wow. I only have around 500 of them. Looks like even 2TB might be overkill.

[braxus]

Oh well. They had a good price on a 2TB Iomega drive, so I picked it up. I guess I'll have lots of room for future expansion.

[Pentium100]

A 74 minute CD is 650mb. An 80mb CD is 700mb, as mentioned earlier.
Not really.

1 minute of CD quality audio in uncompressed PCM is about 10MB, so a 74 minute CD would be ~740MB and an 80min CD would be 800MB.

When you record data to the CD, it is recorded using more space for error correction (1 uncorrectable bit on an audio CD might be inaudible or at most would affect a very small part of the CD, 1 wrong bit on a data CD might make the entire CD useless). That's why a 74min CD holds 740MB of audio but only 650MB of data. The 90MB is the additional error correction (Audio CD has error correction too, but not as much).

Not that it changes the fact that a 2TB (which is 2000GB, drive manufacturers use the decimal system) hard drive would fit a LOT of CDs.

[Rat44]

Second the dbPoweramp for ripping.*thumbsup*
Having the rip done right the first time is money and time well spent.
I have been using MediaMonkey for a player and Cattrax for cataloging.
Foobar is also a great alternative player.

[Arnold_Layne]

3000 CDs! Wow. I only have around 500 of them. Looks like even 2TB might be overkill.

I only have about 500CD's as well. I ripped about 450 of them to ALAC using dbpoweramp. I then transfered them all to itunes (which will leave ALAC files as is) then upload them to my ipod classic. The ipod is still not full (though it is 90% full). With around 4700+ songs all in a lossless codec. The ipod has a 160GB hard drive.

If you get a music server and decide to use a lossless codec like FLAC, with only 500CD's even a 250GB hard drive is more than big enough.

Steve

[tcp100]

Not really.

1 minute of CD quality audio in uncompressed PCM is about 10MB, so a 74 minute CD would be ~740MB and an 80min CD would be 800MB.

When you record data to the CD, it is recorded using more space for error correction (1 uncorrectable bit on an audio CD might be inaudible or at most would affect a very small part of the CD, 1 wrong bit on a data CD might make the entire CD useless). That's why a 74min CD holds 740MB of audio but only 650MB of data. The 90MB is the additional error correction (Audio CD has error correction too, but not as much).

Not that it changes the fact that a 2TB (which is 2000GB, drive manufacturers use the decimal system) hard drive would fit a LOT of CDs.

Whoops. You're right on both counts..

1) Most drive manufacturers DO use decimal to market their drives as being a bit bigger. Not a big difference, but a difference.

2) Dead on with the error correction. Didn't think of this; you can't directly compare Redbook to CDFS or UDF.

The key with the cd-quality 44.1/16 PCM would be the actual bit rate, which is 44100*16 bits per channel per second, or 1.4112 mb/s. There's also the consideration of the filesystem you're then storing it in, so that's not apples to apples either.

But yes, we're still on the order of 2500-3000 CDs minimum on a 2TB drive, depending on CD length.

[Ricardus]

Is there a thread up here about audio myths? Like the one that was discussed on here about hearing the difference between FLAC and WAV files? I would love to talk about that some more.

[Pentium100]

Is there a thread up here about audio myths? Like the one that was discussed on here about hearing the difference between FLAC and WAV files? I would love to talk about that some more.

I don't think so, but you can start one :)

[Ricardus]

I don't think so, but you can start one :)

Which sub-forum would be the right one to start it in? I am new here and don't want to break any already set conventions.

[Pentium100]

Which sub-forum would be the right one to start it in? I am new here and don't want to break any already set conventions.

I guess the lounge would be appropriate, since it does not really fit in anywhere else.

[Ricardus]

OK, consider it done.

And for the people who might not know how to do the math to figure out how much disk space things take up as WAV files, this (http://www.sounddevices.com/calculator/) is a very useful calculator:

[macman007]

I can't hear the difference in my McIntosh music server flac files when I listen to them. In addition to 350 MB of internal storage, it wlll also run 3 multi disc (500 disc) storage CD player changers and catalog the contents an addition to being able to use different brands ( Sony, Pioneer, ETC.) and uses a GUI interface, a keyboard, Gracenote information catalog information system for the CD Jukeboxes and the hard drive.

It is connected to the net and updates constantly, can be run remotely on a wired or wireless laptop or desktop computer, the components front display or any type of monitor or TV, and is very user friendly. You have the album artwork as well as the play lists, and you can make your own mix CD's in any format and then rip the to Compact Disc to play on any type of home or car player. It's a very cool and useful component that catalogs your digital music collection is a cohesive and easy to access library that will re awaken you to the magic of listening to digital again.

Imagine making a playlist for your cassette or open reel player then rolling the reels and hitting play on the server and recording to open reel or cassette without having to get up and switch CD's, just watch the wheels go round and round, and with auto reverse and bi directional record, you never have to do anything until the recordings are done.

Same thing with party's, set the playlist up, and let her rip for as many hours as you want it to go.

Anyway, FLAC is my preferred method of digital storage for quality and ease of use. I hear well and can not hear ANY difference from the original.

[Bob Boyer]

I can't hear the difference in my McIntosh music server flac files when I listen to them. In addition to 350 MB of internal storage, it wlll also run 3 multi disc (500 disc) storage CD player changers and catalog the contents an addition to being able to use different brands ( Sony, Pioneer, ETC.) and uses a GUI interface, a keyboard, Gracenote information catalog information system for the CD Jukeboxes and the hard drive....

Anyway, FLAC is my preferred method of digital storage for quality and ease of use. I hear well and can not hear ANY difference from the original.

Agreed. Where I hear a difference in what I recorded live to my Teac 3440 and FLAC files of the same music copied over to my computer is the lack of tape hiss I cut out with some subtle use of de-noising software. Otherwise, I can't tell the difference between master tape and 24 bit/96kHz files.

[Warped Bezel]

OK, consider it done.

And for the people who might not know how to do the math to figure out how much disk space things take up as WAV files, this (http://www.sounddevices.com/calculator/) is a very useful calculator:

Until this laptop I've often had 100-220 GB of storage anyway. I have over 30 GB of back up to CD and DVD, including a few complete programs in case the CD copy fails.

I don't use cloud storage, the backup stuff the ISP offers. Recordable CDs and DVDs are relatively inexpensive at the thrifts here anyway, still have enough blanks.

If you're stuck with an old laptop with 30 GB you don't want to go nutz anyway. If you are Disczilla, get wicked with the atomic ripping fire breath and get the right crap.

But you still ought to hear some of the hairballs I get on old computers. I have to wonder if they had a YORX DAC *flame*

[gamve]

Jitter, BTW, is highly over exaggerated as affecting CD sound.

Excuse me are you serious. I beg to differ. Jitter IMHO is the bane of digital CD reproduction. Have a look at the amount of material on the net that supports this same view. I have heard this said before but only by people with there ears painted on.

[Warped Bezel]

Whoops. You're right on both counts..

1) Most drive manufacturers DO use decimal to market their drives as being a bit bigger. Not a big difference, but a difference.

2) Dead on with the error correction. Didn't think of this; you can't directly compare Redbook to CDFS or UDF.

The key with the cd-quality 44.1/16 PCM would be the actual bit rate, which is 44100*16 bits per channel per second, or 1.4112 mb/s. There's also the consideration of the filesystem you're then storing it in, so that's not apples to apples either.

WAV files in Windows Media Player are created with this bandwidth. Ripping a standard record-label title to the hard drive at this rate leaves you with some kick-ass quality tunes. It also is easy to compile and convert back later, decent MP3s as well.