[mfsoa]

Hi all,
I'm trying learn up for the inevitable day I go to a PC server, so here are some basic questions.

I hear that FLAC allows for more complete tagging of the audio files than WAV does, but in practical terms what can you do w/ FLAC that you can't w/ WAV, file-naming-wise?

If I get a squeezebox and use WAV, can't I still search by artist, album, song? - I don't think I'll need more than that. What are the limitations that you ultimately bump into with WAV, as far as tagging (or whatever the WAV equivalent is called - Labelling?)

And if I use EAC to rip WAV, which of the "Action" steps gets you individual songs under the album and artist file structure, as opposed to ripping the whole thing as a single WAV that needs to be split up manually if individual songs are needed? Copy image & create cue sheet I figger - But then do you need to copy the cue sheet also if you move the tunes to a different drive?

Thanks for bearing with the newb questions!

-Mike

[hmen]

I'm bumping this because I'd like to know also. AND is there any place I can find a good tutorial on ripping to FLAC? Thanks.

[Crimson]

The difference is that the tags are stored as part of a FLAC file. This is not the case with WAV. When you rip to WAV the tag info is stored as a separate 'database' file. The problem arises when you move WAV files (from one directory to another, or from one hard drive to another) none of the tags follow, which can be a major pain in the you-know-what.

As an aside, AIFF files, which are uncompressed support 'tag porting'.

[mfsoa]

So backing up WAV files you also need to back up the CUE sheet?

Why are WAV files any different from lets say a .DOC? If I have a Miles Davis folder, with Kind of Blue subfolder and Blue in Green as one file in that folder, can't this be copied as is? - Or I guess it's that this folder structure isn't where Slimserver gets it's info from? Where does the info come from that Slim uses to search etc?

Thanks

-Mike

[Crimson]

So backing up WAV files you also need to back up the CUE sheet?

Why are WAV files any different from lets say a .DOC? If I have a Miles Davis folder, with Kind of Blue subfolder and Blue in Green as one file in that folder, can't this be copied as is? - Or I guess it's that this folder structure isn't where Slimserver gets it's info from? Where does the info come from that Slim uses to search etc?

Thanks

-Mike

I don't think backing up the CUE sheet will fix the issue unless the restore process is done to the exact same directory structure. All tag associations with WAV files are based on file paths; if the path changes the tags are gone.

A little anecdote: I originally started ripping my library as all WAV. Over the years, I upgraded computers as well as storage locations. Because of this fact, it became painfully evident to me that WAV was not suitable for the long haul as far as tag information is concerned. After careful consideration and listening, I decided to re-rip my entire library in a format that supports relocating all my music files without losing any of the tag info. And let me tell you, ripping your entire library is something you really only will want to do once!

[mfsoa]

Doesn't the Squeezebox software have some kind of rescan thingy? Seems like if you move your Kind of Blue to a different drive and rescan, that the SBox would now be able to find it OK?

Thanks for being patient, I really appreciate it.

-Mike

[Crimson]

Doesn't the Squeezebox software have some kind of rescan thingy? Seems like if you move your Kind of Blue to a different drive and rescan, that the SBox would now be able to find it OK?

Thanks for being patient, I really appreciate it.

-Mike

Yes, a rescan will recognize the file as a playable file it can add to it's database, but any additional tag data that you may have stored with the file during the original rip will will be lost. Don't get me wrong. After a lot of manual manipulation the tag data can be restored, but it's actually simpler to re-rip.

[lcrim]

Mike:
Ripping to WAV is really short sighted.  I don't want to have to do it again and flac tags are part of the file.  If I want to grab some music for my Ipod I just translate them to Apple Lossless and I always know what they are.  I move those files all over my home wireless network.  I haven't listened to a CD in several years.  Flac is far and away a better format for people who use their music in many different environments.

[mfsoa]

So back to my first question - What info can be included in a FLAC tag that comes in handy, that cannot be captured and associated with a WAV file.

All I need is for Slimserver to be able to find a certain track, or album, or artist when I tell it to.

Seems like I should be able to do this with WAV.

Maybe I have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the tags are used for

Thanks

[mfsoa]

Larry,
Since you're in my area I might have to bribe you to come over for a tutorial session someday!


Thanks for the advice.

-Mike

[Crimson]

So back to my first question - What info can be included in a FLAC tag that comes in handy, that cannot be captured and associated with a WAV file.

All I need is for Slimserver to be able to find a certain track, or album, or artist when I tell it to.

Seems like I should be able to do this with WAV.

Maybe I have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the tags are used for

Thanks

There is no difference. You can 'associate' the same data with either format. With Flac, it's part of the file. With WAV, it's not.

[lcrim]

I'll pm you my cell #. Would love to hear your system and help you w/ PC based playback

[richidoo]

Hi Mike,
I started ripping to WAV in the beginning too, but now it's exclusively flac, ripped at default (5) setting. I make sure that the ripping software will add metadata tags to the flac files so that the info can be displayed, searched and scanned by slim. EAC and EZ CD-DA you have to tell it to write the metadata, it is not automatic. I have since switched to dbpoweramp on mgalusha's advice, it is awesome. It knows flacs should have tags, so no problem. It is also very fast and can check itself for perfect rips. Good stuff.

To answer your questions about difference between song info on flac vs wav: flac holds all the info you could ever want inside the song file itself, no cue file or proprietary library database that is obsolete when you change software player. Move the song file and all the info goes with it because it is embedded inside the file. The FLAC song can hold all the info you want. If you move the song from your PC to your portable or HD car player, or laptop, it can always display the artist, title, genre, year of recording, notes, artist, composer, his girlfriend, whatever. All as part of the song file itself.

Wav files have none of that. If you want such data to stick with the file there's only one place to put it, in the file name. It is pure PCM, with no provision to metadata storage. Broadcast wav may have some small provision for song length, etc to help broadcast automation systems, and there are proprietary wav formats like used in audio editing tools (Sound forge, etc) which allow you to save extra data in the file, but that data is specific to the program and can't be seen by any other program, even though the wav would still play anywhere else. It's not what you're looking for. The benefit of wav is that it is easy to stream and but perfect.

So if wav is "dumb" how does the ripper get all the metadata, isn't it on the CD? Nope, it comes from an online database that the ripper accesses after it identifies the CD by a unique ID code written in the CD  file system. FreeDB, etc. Then the ripper software will stick that downloaded info into the target files which can hold metadata where it will remain forever, unless you edit it manually later.

Slimserver/SqueezeCenter will scan wav files and list them as Unknown ARtist, Unknown Title, etc. It knows it's a song, but no clue who or what. To play wavs on SB or Duet, you must manually drill into them using Browse | Music Folder. Then you are looking at folder names and file names to find the song you want. I have used that way primarily because I have a lot of WAV from back when I was paranoid about the wav/flac thing. Now I could care less about the sound difference if it even exists and prefer to have the benefits of flac.

When you use song formats with metadata, slimserver scans and creates a library database of metadata info. Then when you are browsing by artist, genre, etc, you are searching the library database, not the actual hard drive of song files. This makes slimserver navigate much faster, because the database is loaded into memory which is 100 times faster than looking on the hard disk, and even slower if the music files are remote. Even remote files will navigate much faster if you are browsing the database. No can do with wav files, unless you're looking for Unknown Artist.

Since flac is open source, and very popular, it will probably hang on far into the future, whereas you can't be sure what Apple or MSFT will do to the change their formats, or switch to something else. I'd like to have a portable that plays flac though.

I had a lot of "Unknown artists" in my database at first until I cleaned up the directories and started browsing through music folder. But there was one that remained, and one day I played it just to see what it was, Joe Henderson. I was too lazy to change it, so Joe Henderson is officially Unknown Artist forevermore on my slim database. It is my way of remembering him. 
Hope this helps Mike, and hope I didn't put you to sleep so long winded...
Rich

[mfsoa]

Thanks very much Rich, I must confess it's getting late and I'm going to reread your reply more thoroughly tomorrow.

I guess I'm just being a paranoid audiofool about the quality of WAV vs. FLAC  -  Combined with the cheap storage out there I was thinking to stick with WAV but I see there are good reasons for FLAC. I don't use ripped data for a portable device (I just pop it directly onto my wifes Zen from the CDs), but I guess I might in the future.

Do some folks keep an archival WAV copy and then use the FLAC for daily Squeezeboxing? Pretty silly and redundant I guess?

Thanks to all once again.

Larry - Thank you, too - We should definitely get together at some point, too bad you couldn't make the Rave here.

-Mike

[richidoo]

I guess I'm just being a paranoid audiofool about the quality of WAV vs. FLAC  -  Combined with the cheap storage out there I was thinking to stick with WAV but I see there are good reasons for FLAC. I don't use ripped data for a portable device (I just pop it directly onto my wifes Zen from the CDs), but I guess I might in the future.

I had the same reservation when I started ripping to the computer. I was pretty dang sure I could hear a slight difference on high freqs, on well recorded acoustic instruments with complex harmonic signature heavy on high freqs (like accordion) holding long notes against silent background, playing on stock SB3 - not the most powerful computer or well designed high end audio source. It is a good test track, but who listens like that for enjoyment? To me, flac's benefits outweigh any minute sound quality difference that I have to strain to hear anyway. I think a PC and Card-D would eliminate any difference possibly caused by SB. So I rip to flac now and save my pennies to build a nice music computer later.

Do some folks keep an archival WAV copy and then use the FLAC for daily Squeezeboxing? Pretty silly and redundant I guess?

I keep the original CDs. They are PCM, just like wav files, plus pictures!
Have fun Mike!!! Try dbpoweramp, it is great.
-Rich