We think of CD's and spinning magnetic disks as standards but they'll be obsolete soon enough, just like the analog tape and Syquest and Jaz disks we used to rely on. Ummm, maybe YOU think of CD's as spinning magnetic disks, but I think most folks would think of them as spinning optical discs. They do not record information magnetically like analog tape or Syquest or Jaz discs. They DO have a potential to eventually fail, especially cheaply made media like that sold at Office MaxDepotWarehouseMegaoutlet Inc. I've never had one fail yet in over ten years of using them to backup data, but allegedly they will. I agree with the redundant backup strategy you mention. Have two drives that either mirror each other in a RAID configurations (there are plenty of very reasonably priced 2-slot RAID solutions out there that are easy to swop drives into), or do a weekly swop of two separate drives that mirror your original. It is not a question of IF your hard drive will fail, it is simply a matter of when. |
Moral of story: Backing up hard drive is good. Amen. Another moral you are missing: Store your iTunes library separately on an external hard drive...NOT on your main boot drive, especially if it is a significant size library. You will save wear on your boot drive if you listen frequently, it is more portable if you want to move it from computer to computer. One other thing I learned using my G5 (2.7ghz dual-core) as a server - though it makes for a blazing fast server, it is a terrible power-hog. I plugged a watt-meter into my computer system when we noticed our electric bills had gone way up and determined that if left on as a server it uses as much power as my refrigerator! That's a whole lot of power! I'm looking into swapping over to a MacMini or a laptop since I really don't need the speed of a g5 as a server. |
Sfar - Sorry, my bad having misread your post. Yes, either storage medium will definitely eventually fail, no doubt. Backup is the word to live by no matter how your store your data. |
Ckorody - it is only in the ads that Agon does not allow hyperlinks. You don't need to fly stealth in the forums: NeweggOutpostTerabyte drives have a reputation of being slow and unreliable and are usually two or more 500gb platters/drives housed in a single box. I work in photography and graphic arts and no one uses those drives as reliable backup because of that reputation. Is your library really that large, or are you backing up other stuff as well? I'd suggest a mirrored RAID solution like this one (about $369 street) where you can swop out the SATA drives very easily and inexpensively. There are other options in that same price bracket as well. My friend has been using this one for about 6 months and is so far very happy with it. I'm still doing a mirrored back up manually with two separate 500gb drives. |
Correction; a 1TB Rocraid is currently just under $300 at Amazon They also have a 1.5TB and 2TB version for not much more $. |
Is there an obvious audible difference between Apple Lossless, WAV and AIFF? I haven't compared. From what I read Apple Lossless seemed good enough. There's plenty of threads on this subject if you do a search. Here's an interesting one I've been involved with lately. Check out my friend, Peter's contribution around midway through the thread. |
It is mathematically impossible that FLAC, Apple Lossless, and AIFF or WAV are producing difference results in sound quality. Yet they most certainly can sound different. It must be that New Math you may have missed at school. |
The paint-by-numbers is a great illustration, Robert (pun not intended). Are there any pills I can take, or some kind of shot to boost my immunity to those Placebo Infections that House missed? I don't have TV so don't keep up with such informative programing :-I
Marco |
Let me ask you a question, since you're convinced that they can sound different.
Take a folder full of Word documents. ZIP it. Heck, re-ZIP it several times. Extract all the files. Do your Word documents look different? Did the formatting change? What about the letters? Did new words get inserted, or some others deleted?
We are not talking about a Word file. It does not have to be converted in the same way to convey timing information as well as content through various electronic devices to an electromechanical device. Regardless of your reasoning, my ears tell me different. I cannot explain it beyond that. I am not an expert in such matters by any stretch of the imagination. My friend did a rip via EAC to WAV and converted that rip to ALAC in iTunes. We compared that to a rip of the same tune directly via iTunes to ALAC. I can tell you with high certainty that on my system I could identify the files blindly 10/10 times. My friend felt the same way on his (very resolving) system. Yet in theory they should be bit-for-bit identical files. I can upload those two files should you care to compare them yourself and see if you agree, or you could try the same experiment if you have EAC and iTunes. On my office system, which is far less resolving, I could not tell the difference at all in the two files. There's plenty of discussions on similar topics on this and other sites. Choose whatever you'd like to believe, and use whatever works for you. I get your reasoning, and on face value it looks good on the page, but in real life, to my ears, it doesn't work that way. Enjoy the music! |
Hi Robert - I think there are some FLAC conversion software options (MacFlac), but I'm not really familiar with them, nor their effectiveness. If they work like the EAC conversion my friend did, I'd be pretty happy and willing to try them. With the EAC WAV to AL you loose all the metadata (read: very bad...major PITA to manually replace it). Same with EAC, it would have to be converted. Alas, ALAC. Someone with more geek creds will have to help us here, Robert. |
You can believe that you can tell the difference 10/10 times. Fundamentals of mathematics and computer science prove unequivocally that you cannot in reality do so I believe that in reality I can do so. Mathematics or computer science may have nothing to do why, and perhaps I don't understand it. Yet one file sounds consistently better to me. He actually supplied me with three files initially, and I also had a WAV file I had ripped myself of the same song. I picked out the single file from the four as sounding better, and I had no idea of what he was giving me or why. He just asked that I listen to the three and that I might be surprised by what I heard. The other three files all sounded the same, or too close to make a distinction, but one kept standing out with greater clarity, separation and slightly better bass. I will give a blind test a try next time I have someone over who's willing to spend the time to conduct it. Heck, I'll give the test to someone who has no clue as to what they're listening to and see what happens. Hey, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'll be able to pick it out each time. I care as much about mathematics proving me wrong as I would about a tube amp not measuring up well by conventional standards. Ultimately you have to listen to it, and if you like what you are hearing better on one over another, what does it matter? FTR I am not re-ripping my entire library to conform to the convention my friend used. It's actually a royal PITA and I would not consider it. The difference is not that profound, even though I can clearly hear it. Ping me off the thread if you are interested in the files in question. I can post them later on and give you a link to download, listen and analyze the two files yourself. As I said, my system is pretty resolving and I'm quite sure I cannot tell any difference at all on my office system. So it will not surprise me at all if you cannot hear a difference on a less resolving system. I'd be curious to hear what you come up with. Maybe I need to up my medication! |
It very well could be, Shadorne. I don't know...I can only tell you what I hear.
I seem recall reading something recently about the newest version of iTunes making some difference in the sound of ripped files of the same types. |
Shadorne - Here's a further, long thread on Head-Fi that supports your contention that the software may be responsible. I have not read the whole thread, but suspected as much myself given the difference in the qualities of the two files I have (EAC vs iTunes older version than current). I confess, this stuff is way over my head - I'm just reporting on what I hear and the little I do think I understand. I participate in the Modwright forums over on Audiocircle because I use a MW Transporter. The folks in the know over there seem to much prefer using dbPoweramp to rip files. |
Hey Robert - I've done similar comparisons, but with WAV files comparing to ALAC. I've had really mixed results there. Sometimes there's been a clear difference with WAV sounding consistently better, and others (on other rips of different CD's) I cannot tell any difference. This was in versions past of iTunes which seem to get changed as frequently as jockey shorts. If you thought differences while sticking with iTunes options were important, if you haven't tried it I'd suggest trying EAC rips (or dbPoweramp) and comparing those to iTunes. Again, I've heard that the very latest version of iTunes does address some problems they've been having with ripping. |
Hey Spencer - thanks for the vote of confidence. I'm sure there must be scientific reasons for what I'm hearing and likely they're buried in the ripping software.
My friend, whose system I've enjoyed over many years now, and where I've done lots of interesting comparisons, has a really nice analog rig (Teres/Shelter/Origin/Einstein). Just recently I brought my MW Transporter over there and we listened over a weekend, mostly comparing preamps and digital front ends (all very nice stuff too including the MW TP and Empirical PaceCar and Electrocompaniet player), throwing in his vinyl rig every now and then. I have to say that I still prefer vinyl - BUT that the margins are becoming narrower and narrower every time I've had the opportunity to make such comparisons. This, in spite of all the file ripping foibles mentioned here, given that all the PC files we were listening to had been ripped in iTunes to either AL or WAV or AIFF. I'm not suggesting you give up your analog, and I agree, there's lots to sort out in PC Audio. OTOH There is a whole lot to be desired for having an entire library of music at your fingertips that you can mix and match at will though without hesitations. It's definitely worth a listen to what's out there these days - you may be very pleasantly surprised that the margins of difference can be surprisingly narrow, with plenty to be enjoyed in both arenas. |
Yeah, I got to hear a friends' ModWright Transporter and was very impressed. One of the top digital sources I've heard. That experience was the first time I actually felt a positive reaction to any digital gear that made think, "Perhaps we will get 'There' someday soon". Spender - Yes, it really is a damn fine digital front end (certainly the best I've heard), and in our comparisons that weekend we both picked it out consistently in blind comparisons to the other digital sources we had (Empirical, Northstar, Electrocompaniet) as our preference without any exception. Your friend will probably tell you that rolling the tubes (1 rectifier and 2 output tubes) in the MW TP can have a tremendous impact on the presentation (I think because they are closer to the source - well, they are at the source). I've never heard swapping a rectifier tube make such a large difference in any amp I've owned, but in the TP the difference can be profound. There's a tube-rolling thread for the MWTP on Audiocircle that is currently running at 56 pages of posts, to give you some idea of what I'm talking about. If your friend hasn't checked that out they should as it may open up a whole new level of performance to them. To save them the long read - The almost universally favored combination with occasional variations, is the EML 5U4G Mesh combined with either 6CG7 cleartops, or 6SN7 Tungsol Rounds with octal adapters (the TP has 9-pin output sockets). There's also some discussion on other threads where some report a marginal preference of running the network into the TP via a wired ethernet connection. The TP also has a word-clock input, which I've wanted to try with my friend's PaceCar (not sure how that would work out). |
