[rif]

I've never used dbPoweramp, but the website rated which CD drives were best for ripping.  Not sure that applies anymore given the improvements over the years.

If that's something you're interested in, PM me and I'll see if I still have some in my stash.

[Vincent Kars]

https://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?48320-CD-Drive-Accuracy-2022

[RipVanW]

That is a matter of "luck"
...
A couple of developers decided to circumnavigate the tagging problem by writing ID3 tags in a info chunk.
Indeed, MP3tag does this and Foobar as well.
But it is not a standard so  use other software and all your tags are invisible.

Ah.. .that explains it.  I knew I wasn't crazy, but I also knew the folks on here had been down that road many more times than myself, so they weren't crazy either. Turns out we're both sane.    That also gives me backing to know that .wav probably isn't the best format to use.

The reasons I use FLAC
- Excellent tagging support including custom tags.
...
- Checksum. FLAC has a internal MD5. You can always check if the data is corrupted.
- Support. Today almost universal except of course Apple.

Custom tags, eh?  Not possible with AIFF I take it?

The checksum is a nice feature.  My end game is to use a ZFS-based NAS, and those are very effective when it comes to ensuring that data-in=data-out, but it's still nice to have.

The comment on 'except of course for Apple' caused me to go down a couple of deep rabbit holes.  I wasn't aware that iTunes/Apple Music didn't support FLAC.  It won't affect me since I don't use those programs.  However, we're in a split Android/iPhone household, and the other half uses iTunes exclusively for music.  At first I was thinking about converting to AIFF for iTunes compatibility, so I looked into whether you could configure iTunes to connect to a NAS. What I found were all sorts of problems and not many good answers.  Since it was mostly a courtesy and our music tastes are pretty divergent anyway, I think I'll forego that for now, and not worry about setting up dual access.  If there's interest, maybe setting up a separate app on the iPhone to access my music would be best.  But.. that brings me back to FLAC vs AIFF...

No decisions yet.  I appreciate all of the feedback though. It's useful. 

I've never used dbPoweramp, but the website rated which CD drives were best for ripping.  Not sure that applies anymore given the improvements over the years.

https://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?48320-CD-Drive-Accuracy-2022

I was just looking on their website for the post when Vincent's link came through.  Thank you!  I'll have to take a look at the drive in my main ripping system tonight and see where it stands.  I know it's a Pioneer BluRay writer, but not sure beyond that without looking.  I see a few Pioneer BD-RW's in the 'best-of' category, so that's promising.

[rbbert]

The MD5 in FLAC is different from data in = data out; it is used to confirm that the data in the file corresponds to the information in the "header" generated when the file (FLAC or any data) was created.

[Vincent Kars]

that brings me back to FLAC vs AIFF

Maybe have a look at ALAC, Apples own FLAC?

[Vincent Kars]

The MD5 in FLAC is different from data in = data out; it is used to confirm that the data in the file corresponds to the information in the "header" generated when the file (FLAC or any data) was created.

Wonder what you are trying to convey.
To the best of my knowledge
FLAC –t FileToTest.FLAC
Will tell you if the audio part differs from what once has been encoded.
If so, it is corrupted.

[rbbert]

Wonder what you are trying to convey.
To the best of my knowledge
FLAC –t FileToTest.FLAC
Will tell you if the audio part differs from what once has been encoded.
If so, it is corrupted.

The OP was questioning the need or utility of FLAC MD5 because the NAS he is planning to use ensures "data in = data out", which (it seems to me) has nothing to do with MD5 checksum for file data integrity; perhaps I am wrong?

[RipVanW]

Maybe have a look at ALAC, Apples own FLAC?

The problems I was seeing with getting Apple Music to work with a local NAS weren't due to file-level incompatibility as much as higher level server connection stuff.  I didn't read too deeply, but after going through a couple of Google searches and a dozen web pages or so, what I took away from the search was that there were a lot of people having problems, and there weren't any quick and easy answers (e.g. here https://www.synoforum.com/threads/itunes-server-media-locations.7119/).  My other half is one who likes to press the 'Easy' button and has little patience for things that don't work well and need tweaking, so I just decided it wasn't worth the hassle, and moved on from that 'feature'.

The OP was questioning the need or utility of FLAC MD5 because the NAS he is planning to use ensures "data in = data out", which (it seems to me) has nothing to do with MD5 checksum for file data integrity; perhaps I am wrong?

The 'data-in=data-out' I was referring to was the higher level of file-level checksums that ZFS uses, and (if enough drives are used) the self-healing aspect of it.  Granted, for audio, a bit or two out of a couple of billion that gets flipped once in five years due to bit rot isn't the end of the end of the world like it might be on a system that stores credit card numbers, but it's still nice to have.    How that's different from the MD5 in FLAC is what I'm not quite sure of yet...?

[Vincent Kars]

MD5 checksum for file data integrity

Almost all parts of a computer are "save".
However the memory of a PC is not ECC so there is a very small change when editing=rewriting the file, it get corrupted.
Happened to me on 2 out of 20k tracks.
First world problem but that are the kind of problems I love  and of course are totally unacceptable 
Indeed FLAC allows you to check this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECC_memory

[zoom25]

Compressed (highest level) FLAC is my preferred choice for my master archive library and for use with Roon. Highest compression to maximize space storage. FLAC because it's the best in terms of metadata being displayed correctly in all types of software and hardware. I've had issues where ALAC or even AIFF could not display certain fields (e.g. title track, year). I've had the least issues with FLAC.

If for SQ or another reason you want another library in another format (such as WAV with tags), you can do a batch conversion and duplication with a program like XLD (on Mac). I use an identical but separate WAV library for playback with one of my systems as it sounded better than other formats.

Hard drives are cheap and computers are very fast in creating duplicate libraries. You can compare both that way.

[Yog Sothoth]

The 'data-in=data-out' I was referring to was the higher level of file-level checksums that ZFS uses, and (if enough drives are used) the self-healing aspect of it.  Granted, for audio, a bit or two out of a couple of billion that gets flipped once in five years due to bit rot isn't the end of the end of the world like it might be on a system that stores credit card numbers, but it's still nice to have.    How that's different from the MD5 in FLAC is what I'm not quite sure of yet...?

Zfs is indeed very good at this.  I run scrubs weekly on my mirrored zfs file systems and it occasionally does find, and silently repair, bits that are no longer what they were written as.  It will also do this under normal operations if it detects an error.  Assuming the media itself is not bad, it will take a copy from a mirror and overwrite the misread bits with the correct bits.  All of my music library, as well as personal and legal files, are stored this way.

So far it's been very helpful and I have lost no data (that I'm aware of).

[RipVanW]

Almost all parts of a computer are "save".
However the memory of a PC is not ECC so there is a very small change when editing=rewriting the file, it get corrupted.
Happened to me on 2 out of 20k tracks.

Yep, I'm well aware of ECC vs non-ECC memory.  Sometimes I have discussions with the Purchasing folks at work when they ask if they can save a few dollars and buy non-ECC instead when we have to replace some.  I try to squash those thoughts...

So if I'm understanding the comments, the main reason for the MD5 checksum in the FLAC file is as a cross-check to ensure that (1) the audio data was written correctly in the first place (e.g. the non-ECC RAM bit flip kinda thing while initially writing the file), and (2) the audio data hasn't been corrupted in the time following when it was first written (which shouldn't happen at all, but is more likely to happen on traditional, non-ZFS file systems).  Yeah, I'll buy that.

Compressed (highest level) FLAC is my preferred choice for my master archive library and for use with Roon. Highest compression to maximize space storage. FLAC because it's the best in terms of metadata being displayed correctly in all types of software and hardware. I've had issues where ALAC or even AIFF could not display certain fields (e.g. title track, year). I've had the least issues with FLAC.

If for SQ or another reason you want another library in another format (such as WAV with tags), you can do a batch conversion and duplication

Seems like we keep coming back to compatibility, with FLAC being the most compatible.  I'm starting to lean more and more towards that, just for that reason.

True, I could batch-convert from one format to another if for whatever reason I felt the need to.  dBpoweramp is bundled with a converter program, and I've also been using ffmpeg quite a bit lately, so I know with a few scripts it could be used as well (though it would likely be easier just to use the bundled dBpa companion program).  The question becomes whether I want to make compressed or uncompressed my 'primary' to start out with.  Hmmmmm

Zfs is indeed very good at this.  I run scrubs weekly on my mirrored zfs file systems and it occasionally does find, and silently repair, bits that are no longer what they were written as

I first read about ZFS sometime in the last month.  I liked what I read.  Hearing your comments makes me more interested in using it here.  Right now I'm leaning towards TrueNAS.  I know I could roll my own, but it looks like they've already done the work, and it would be relatively quick to get online once I pull the hardware together.

[Yog Sothoth]

I first read about ZFS sometime in the last month.  I liked what I read.  Hearing your comments makes me more interested in using it here.  Right now I'm leaning towards TrueNAS.  I know I could roll my own, but it looks like they've already done the work, and it would be relatively quick to get online once I pull the hardware together.

I've been using openZFs for years and never lost a bit yet!  I've also used btrfs, and been bitten every time; I'm hoping it will mature enough to be usable. On the other hand I've used the linux MD driver for years and never lost a bit. 

At this very moment I'm resilvering a failed 4TB drive with a replacement in my 4 way ZFS mirror.  True it takes some time, but I do feel my data is very secure.

What I'm really hoping is for true erasure codes to be implemented in some file system; that would add even better data integrity and scalability.   But right now, for my music library, I'm pretty happy with ZFS or MD.   I think TrueNAS is an excellent alternative!

[mgalusha]

What I'm really hoping is for true erasure codes to be implemented in some file system; that would add even better data integrity and scalability.   But right now, for my music library, I'm pretty happy with ZFS or MD.   I think TrueNAS is an excellent alternative!

I'm a ZFS fan as well. I have a QNAP that has ZFS and two Truenas Scale servers, I use synchthing to keep them up to date. I'm paranoid about losing my music.

[Yog Sothoth]

I'm a ZFS fan as well. I have a QNAP that has ZFS and two Truenas Scale servers, I use synchthing to keep them up to date. I'm paranoid about losing my music.

I think this is a valuable discussion!  Perhaps we should start a separate thread for it?  I hate to stray too far from the OP's original intent.

[Yog Sothoth]

I think this is a valuable discussion!  Perhaps we should start a separate thread for it?  I hate to stray too far from the OP's original intent.

I've started a new thread titled "Music storage and server technologies".  I'm not sure if it should live in The Discless Circle still or in the general IT circle; I've added a note asking the moderator for guidance. 

[Rusty Jefferson]

...The question becomes whether I want to make compressed or uncompressed my 'primary' to start out with.  Hmmmmm .....

It's just a drop down menu selection. I do rip lesser quality cds in regular FLAC to conserve space and rip uncompressed FLAC for the important/better quality recordings. It's easy to see at a glance how you ripped something in the future.

[Carlman]

For the portable player problem, it's easy to do a batch-conversion when needed if I want something to listen to on a plane.  But, those times are few and far between (which is why I still have my Sansa), and you're not going to hear the nuances of a song with a jet engine that close to you, so I might as well load a bunch of high-bit-rate MP3s at that point.  Not to mention that I imagine these days portable players have gigs of memory in them anyway, and plane rides are only so long.

I use a Samsung S9 phone w/ Onkyo HF as my 'portable player'.  It allows me to put a huge SD card in it and store all my flac files (ripped using EAC over many years).  It is overkill on the plane or in the airport.  However, in the hotel at night when you *can* hear well, it really shines.

I've found for portable use, to use Pandora and 1more quad driver IEMs with Comply tips.  (I'm sure you could an use any other music app/service..) but I just download a playlist of songs prior to my flight over time.  Also, from a practical standpoint, all I have to do is think about a song I want to hear, and it's usually there.  Some fairly obscure stuff is available... but not always.  I turn off my analytical brain and turn on my musical enjoyment brain for portable music.  You really need a controlled environment to hear nuances.  ANC, IEM's, and so on can only do so much compared to a dedicated sound room.  Or if you're ok with wearing 2 bookshelf speakers attached to your head w/ a strap on top (ala Audeze), you can get pretty close. ha. But, you still need a special environment to enjoy fancy headphones.

Just wanted to weigh in on the portable thing so you'd have a little food for thought. 
The reason I'm even in this thread... I'm looking for a modular solution that can barely touch the quality I get in my dedicated room.  I'd like my home PC to have a nice little DAC that I can also connect to my phone w/ usb-c... and take it with me.  It needs to sound noticeably better than my Dell's onboard dac.  I can post about that in another thread if I don't find what I'm looking for.

I've considered switching to dbpa for years, just haven't had the time to do a real comparison between 2 or 3 cd's ripped from 2005 EAC to 2022 EAC and 2022 dbpa.  I like to compare and see if there is any real difference before diving into anything. 

What really sucks is I have over 1000 cds and my tastes have changed so much over the years that I could delete most of them.  Other times I can't believe I put some albums in the 'to be deleted' folder and they re-enter my current rotation.  There are so many OCD issues with music collections.  I'm re-thinking how I listen and what I listen to these days.  So, organizing music is on my list of to-do's.. but it'll be a very long process unfortunately.

Just food for thought here...

[jpm]

Does anyone have experience of using appliances to rip CDs, like the Bluesound Vault or Naim Unitiserve?

[Freo-1]

I use Foobar 2000 to rip CDs.  Since memory is pretty cheap these days, I use .wav vs. .flac.   I've noticed a very slight loss of presence with .flac vs. .wav files.  It's not much, but it's noticeable with my playback equipment.   I realize not everyone will agree with this assessment.  I didn't notice any difference until I upgraded my digital front end.