[acresm22]

I'm venturing down the server/PC-based audio road. So far I've only ripped two CDs as FLAC files to an external HD using Winnamp. Before I continue with the vast CD collection, I have a couple questions:
1) I've been reading a lot on AC about FLAC uncompressed. As far as I can tell, that's not an option with Winnamp but is with dbpoweramp. Is dbpoweramp a better option than winnamp in general? And is dbpoweramp a free download like winnamp?
2) Using winnamp, I'm given an option (1-8 scale) when converting to FLAC, 1 being fastest rip and 8 being best compression. I assume I should always move that dial to 8 when ripping CDs, correct?
3) I've opted for FLAC instead of WAV on winnamp thus far. Any reason I should reconsider that choice?
Thanks, all, for your help!

[toddbagwell]

Dbpower amp has a free version, but not all of the features are available after the trial period. It costs 38 bucks for the full version which gives you the CD ripper, music converter and batch converter.

In my opinion, well worth the cost of the download.

About FLAC compression, 8 is more cpu intensive and slower to encode. This makes for smaller files if space is a concern. Some people feel there is an audible difference between compressed and uncompressed files. The way to know for yourself is to listen to both and decide.

As far as flac vs wav: wav struggles with tagging and metadata support. Uncompressed flac or aiff are better with tagging of metadata than wav, but again some hear an improvement with wav. You'll need to try for yourself to determine if the difficulty tagging is worth it to you.


Later
Todd

[AB]

When you rip to FLAC you are using libFLAC no matter what front end you've got - dbPoweramp or Winamp. The choice of dbPoweramp vs whatever is not to be based on ripping to FLAC.

Ease of tagging and its accuraterip integration is what keeps me using dbPoweramp.

[audioseduction]

I prefer using dbpoweramp  ripping FLAC Lossless uncompressed so it's less CPU intensive for your music server which equals better playback performance in my book.



FLAC stored on Western Digital NAS --> LAN --> PC with Windows 7 Pro/JRiver Media Center 16 --> Cardas Lightning 15 Digital RCA Interconnect --> bel canto DAC3.5VB/VBS1 Power Supply --> NORDOST BALDUR XLR Interconnects --> Pass Labs xp20 Pre --> Pass Labs xa160.5 Mono Blocks--> Tara Labs ISM The One Speaker Cables --> Martin Logan Summit X speakers

[acresm22]

Thanks for the replies, guys.
I guess I'm still a bit confused on the FLAC levels in Winnamp. Since FLAC 8 is labeled as best compression, is FLAC 1 uncompressed?
I saw this post on another forum, and this makes it sound like there is no audible difference in any of the FLAC levels:

"The compression setting in FLAC does not affect the accuracy of the resulting file. It is still a lossless file that you can later decompress and or convert to any other loless or lossy format. The compression setting simply tells the FLAC endcoer how much effort to put into the encoding. The maximum level ( will result in slightly smaller FLAC files but they will take longer to generate. If you decompress them, however, you can compare the binary contents of the files and see that the uncompressed data is identical to the original or the decompressed outpt from any FLAC file compressed at a different setting. Also the compression setting makes very little difference to the decoding effort required."

[eclein]

As far as flac vs wav: wav struggles with tagging and metadata support. Uncompressed flac or aiff are better with tagging of metadata than wav, but again some hear an improvement with wav. You'll need to try for yourself to determine if the difficulty tagging is worth it to you.
Later
Todd

TRUE as TRUE can be....I started doing WAV (I could hear a difference I thought) then the whole headache of tagging the files correctly and having them display...well I now do FLAC and most offerings that are sold online are FLAC, at least that I've seen..Flac is easier, the difference I heard was not worth the headache I got!!!!! Thats me though others may have an easier time of it, it annoys me...LOL...

[firedog]

dbpoweramp as a ripper: more flexible and more features than Winamp as a ripper. It also has "secure" ripping and ensures bit perfect rips, which WA doesn't.

FLAC - using the highest compression only saves a little HD space; the highly compressed files can, at times be problematic on cnertain setups. I would compress at level 5 instead.

Uncompressed FLAC is a great option if you don't want to conserve HD space. It is essentially the same as a WAV file, but in a FLAC "shell". The shell allows for full tagging, which is a huge advantage, and you have none of the possible disadvantages of compressed files. Another reason to buy dbpoweramp.