I can't even bring myself to go "computer based."

I admire your temerity!

If I ever get the gumption, you can bet I'll come here for hand holding as I "F-Bomb" my way through it!

Best wishes!

Quote:
I am currently spending a lot of time on hard drive housekeeping. I got a new computer, which is great, but now I am consolidating two libraries, a full and high rez external hard drive for WMP and my mp3s for iTunes.
So I am spending about 30 minutes a night making sure that every album has cover art and that they are in the right genre and so on and so forth.
It is a pain. And I end up doing it when the drives are stable too. About 10 minutes a night then.
Am I alone in this? Is your hard drive demanding?Trey

Yes, it can be a headache but it's easier with a Mac & the various add-on programs that come with iTunes. Still, I don't trust any hard drive or back - up. Gimme the old fashioned solid kind of music storage mediums anytime.

The downside of computer based music libraries is deal with hard drives and all their requirements plus dealing with the various requirements of the music files themselves.

Hard drives require backup. I use the word "require" since not having a decent backup plan and sticking to that plan will only lead to disaster. In addition to a useful backup strategy one also needs some kind overall system with which to organize one's data. Relying on programs like iTunes to organize one's library is not a viable solution.

The files themselves also require a good deal of work: format conversion (if necessary), tagging, cover art, etc.

All of these needs and tasks can be very annoying but are not without rewards:

instant access to one's entire music library from anywhere in one's home (if using music streaming devices)

minimal space requirements (how much space does a 2TB hard drive take versus the space of several thousand CDs?)

and my favorites:

no more having to put away CDs after listening

never having to hunt for a CD

never having to go through the time consuming process of making room for new CDs in one's collection - come on, fess up - how many of you have a huge back log of "new" CDs waiting to properly filed away but the prospect of shifting around all of one's CD collection just leads to an ever increasing pile of "new" CDs?

And last but not least: high resolution downloads!!!

You got it right JazzFan.

Although I don't think Itunes is a disaster. I am too lazy to use anything else.

It doesn't do quite as well with classical but it is far better than my old filing system : throwing the Cd on a shelf and forgetting where it is

Buddha, I am surprised you aren't doing this, it is so easy even I can do it and I am way computer illiterate. I will warn you though, once you get used to streaming it's hard to go back.

Quote:
You got it right JazzFan.

Quote:
And Jazzfan nailed the benefits.

WOW!! Two forum members agreeing with me in one thread! Will wonders ever cease?

Now if we could only convince JA & company that Stereophile needs more coverage on the specifics of how to use and maintain a hard drive based music library. I'm so tired of having computer nerds doing all the heavy lifting especially since most of them think that the ultimate in sound quality is a 320kbps mp3 file and they often feel that even that high a bit rate is overkill!

Audiophiles need other audiophiles to explain these issues since only audiophiles will do so with sound quality as the most important aspect.

Aside: I realize that I seem to be harping on this expanded coverage issue every chance I get but until audiophiles are shown that computer based music playback can be a true high end source then I fear that the sound quality aspect will take a back seat to other less important (from a high end audio perspective) aspects.

There are some cool programs available that analyze your entire hard drive and generate a visual depiction of what's on the drive. For Mac, I use Disk Inventory X , and for PC there is WinDirStat . Both of them work in mostly the same way and create the same graphical results that show your file directories with different colors for each file type. Give it a shot to see how everything is organized and if there's any useless files taking up space.

Quote:
Now if we could only convince JA & company that Stereophile needs more coverage on the specifics of how to use and maintain a hard drive based music library.

I'll cover the basics right now:

Fundamental computer operations like file copying, renaming, and backup should be a necessary life skill at the start of the second decade of the 21st century; I hardly think it worth giving up space for audio component coverage in Stereophile to cover PC basics.

Buy 3 standalone hard drives of at least 1TB capacity each. Can be eSTA, FireWire, or USB2.0, whatever your PC likes. Keep your music library on one, back it up at regular intervals to the other two. Keep one backup drive at home, the other somewhere else. (Or use one of the Web-based storage solutions.) It is extraordinarily unlikely that all 3 drives will fail. If you are really concerned about drive failure, use RAID arrays instead of single drives. Though this will double or triple the cost, the overall costs of your data storage and backup will still be less than a set of high-end cables.

(I'd steer clear of Time Machine for the Mac, however, because if you regularly change a lot of large files on your main drive, it gets in a situation where it never catches up.)

Use whatever music file management and playback program that you like. (Interface preference is highly personal.) I use iTunes slaved to Pure Music on my Mac mini, Foobar 2000 on my PC. Every one of these programs comes with complete instructions on how to optimize playback for bit-transparent operation of the PCM data output from whatever port you choose to use.

Use whatever hardware you prefer. (Read the Stereophile reviews for discussions of resolution and datastream jitter, etc.) I currently use the Halide USB-S/PDIF Bridge on my Mac (review forthcoming) and a Lynx AES16 card on my PC, both feeding digital data to whatever DAC I am using.

Hope this helps. I am not sure what information you would need.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Quote:
Hope this helps. I am not sure what information you would need.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Thanks for the mini seminar on some computer basics but as I've stated before that is only the tip of the iceberg.

And since you asked and please bear in mind that in all cases the answers, solutions and discussions to these questions and issues would be approached from "best" sound quality first and ease of use and convenience second:

1) What program(s) are best for ripping CDs, DVD-Audio, SACD and LPs

2) What programs are best for file tagging

3) What audio formats, i.e. mp3, alac, flac, ape, wav, etc., are best

4) Where can one download hi-rez audio files and what are the best sites

5) What music streaming devices work best

6) Are music only streaming devices a better solution than audio/video/picture streaming devices

7) Why DRM sucks and should be avoided

8) Are high priced USB cable and network wires worthwhile

That's just a quick list and I'm sure that there are many, many more areas in need of exploration. For example you stated:

Quote:
Use whatever music file management and playback program that you like. (Interface preference is highly personal.)

But that is somewhat misleading since choosing a given program may cause certain file types to be unplayable or the program may not offer enough customization features to work well with one's music library.

As more and more high end manufacturers jump on the computer audio bandwagon other topics are constantly emerging, for example what is the difference between a server based streaming device, such as the Squeezebox Touch and a UPnP device, such as Niam's Uniti device and how do those differences impact one's listening.

As you may have already figured out by now, I'm not that easily dissuaded and I will continue this campaign for expanded computer based HIGH END audio until Stereophile sees the upside of this coverage.

Quote:
As you may have already figured out by now, I'm not that easily dissuaded and I will continue this campaign for expanded computer based HIGH END audio until Stereophile sees the upside of this coverage.

Jazzfan, I think it's great that you want more high-quality coverage of computer-based audio. You seem to suggest, however, that Stereophile doesn't see a need for it.

In fact, we have been praising computer-based audio as one of the shining topics in all of hi-fi, and we've promised to deliver more reviews on computer audio products. While we can always offer better and more -- especially, perhaps, in terms of compiling all of our efforts neatly into one place -- you do seem to ignore some of what we have already published.

See, for instance, John Atkinson's primer on getting the best sound from a computer here, and his discussion of digital file formats here. In addition, if you read the reviews in our Computer Audio and Media Servers archives, most, if not all, of your questions will be answered.

Have you read those articles? Did you find them helpful?

Quote:

Quote:
As you may have already figured out by now, I'm not that easily dissuaded and I will continue this campaign for expanded computer based HIGH END audio until Stereophile sees the upside of this coverage.

Jazzfan, I think it's great that you want more high-quality coverage of computer-based audio. You seem to suggest, however, that Stereophile doesn't see a need for it.

In fact, we have been praising computer-based audio as one of the shining topics in all of hi-fi, and we've promised to deliver more reviews on computer audio products. While we can always offer better and more -- especially, perhaps, in terms of compiling all of our efforts neatly into one place -- you do seem to ignore some of what we have already published.

See, for instance, John Atkinson's primer on getting the best sound from a computer here, and his discussion of digital file formats here. In addition, if you read the reviews in our Computer Audio and Media Servers archives, most, if not all, of your questions will be answered.

Have you read those articles? Did you find them helpful?

First thank you for all the links. Yes, as one can easily discern from reading some the above links, Stereophile has always covered the field of computer-based audio and done so with it's usual high standards.

Yes I've read the articles and yes I found them useful.

But (come on, you knew there was a "but" coming) WE WANT MORE and continuing coverage of this exciting subject!

So once again, thanks for the coverage so far and let's continue and expand the good work. A new blog perhaps: low cost (I would think, at least compared to a monthly print column), no loss of equipment review pages and timely. Looks like a win-win to me.

Perhaps we should post a poll on the forum asking whether or not there would be interest in computer-based audio blog on the Stereophile web site.

Quote:
Perhaps we should post a poll on the forum asking whether or not there would be interest in computer-based audio blog on the Stereophile web site.

Hi Jazzfan,

We had a very similar vote about a month ago on our homepage. And you're absolutely right! People do want more computer audio. So we're bringing it. In upcoming issues, we have reviews of the Peachtree iDecco, the Halide Design Bridge, and HRT Music Streamers: II, II+ and Pro. (and we're just scratching the tip of the iceberg).

Thanks for your close attention

Quote:
.....................................................

7) Why DRM sucks and should be avoided....... ...... .. ..... .........
........................

Problem is DRM programs, and similar bits of nasty software, are often invisible to the downloader/purchaser, even on some DVD's & CD's.
Instance, Sony wrote a nasty piece of trojan script that not only wouldn't copy but if you attempted to the result was a trashed operating system that, amongst other binary party tricks, could render a given player inoperable. Fair punishment ?
My other objection to the superficially attractive option of high-resolution downloads is the absurd price many service providers charge for large downloads. That and the speed limitations of todays distribution technology. That's why I'm not an early adopter living, as I do, where I can only get satellite (so-called)broadband charged for at such absurd rates and so slow downloading high-resolution files becomes an exercise in extravagance and frustration.
One option that does appeal to me is Linn's protocol of including a large library of high-res files pre-loaded onto whatever digital black box you buy from them. I predict this practice will soon spread with many companies soon getting into trouble for pre-loading music whose rights they haven't paid for. Ah, we live in interesting times.

This is all very easy for those who don't have much in the way of a vinyl collection. Ripping CD's is easy and there are plenty of apps that do it quick and easy.
Dropping the needle with LP's has to be done in real time. Lets conservatively say 45 minutes per LP. That's not including any tweaking (de-clicking, track separation, labeling etc.) that needs to be done. With +3.5K LP's we're talking up-wards of 4K hours to do my collection. I think I'd rather pull out the appropriate LP and play it or just the selection I want to hear.
There is no doubt you can get excellent sound and unbelievable convenience with a HDD based server. It's just a royal pain in the ass to rip several thousand LP's.
Most (soon all) of my CD collection is on a 2TB drive backed up to another 2TB drive. I'm keeping all of my CD's. They are my ultimate backup. The only maintenance I have to do is add new acquisitions and update the backup drive.

Quote:
This is all very easy for those who don't have much in the way of a vinyl collection. Ripping CD's is easy and there are plenty of apps that do it quick and easy.
Dropping the needle with LP's has to be done in real time. Lets conservatively say 45 minutes per LP. That's not including any tweaking (de-clicking, track separation, labeling etc.) that needs to be done. With +3.5K LP's we're talking up-wards of 4K hours to do my collection. I think I'd rather pull out the appropriate LP and play it or just the selection I want to hear.
There is no doubt you can get excellent sound and unbelievable convenience with a HDD based server. It's just a royal pain in the ass to rip several thousand LP's.
Most (soon all) of my CD collection is on a 2TB drive backed up to another 2TB drive. I'm keeping all of my CD's. They are my ultimate backup. The only maintenance I have to do is add new acquisitions and update the backup drive.

Point well taken but have some sympathy of me poor idiot who's collected 11,587 LP's at last count.
I started ripping them to CD-R only to be told I should have been putting them onto a higher resolution format so I've already wasted too much time and money. I'll stick with the old turntable for LP's and hope one day that recording companies start offering high resolution files on memory sticks, delivered by snail mail. Is that too much to ask for?

Quote:

Quote:
.....................................................

7) Why DRM sucks and should be avoided....... ...... .. ..... .........
........................

Problem is DRM programs, and similar bits of nasty software, are often invisible to the downloader/purchaser, even on some DVD's & CD's.
Instance, Sony wrote a nasty piece of trojan script that not only wouldn't copy but if you attempted to the result was a trashed operating system that, amongst other binary party tricks, could render a given player inoperable. Fair punishment ?
My other objection to the superficially attractive option of high-resolution downloads is the absurd price many service providers charge for large downloads. That and the speed limitations of todays distribution technology. That's why I'm not an early adopter living, as I do, where I can only get satellite (so-called)broadband charged for at such absurd rates and so slow downloading high-resolution files becomes an exercise in extravagance and frustration.
One option that does appeal to me is Linn's protocol of including a large library of high-res files pre-loaded onto whatever digital black box you buy from them. I predict this practice will soon spread with many companies soon getting into trouble for pre-loading music whose rights they haven't paid for. Ah, we live in interesting times.

There is an interesting review of a high end media server in Home Theater this month: Home Theater Kaleidescape review
They sell the server pre-loaded. It has four 2TB drives. btw. If you rip a blu-ray disc to the server, you must pop in the actual disc, when asked to verify. Seems a little counter productive, but the server still sounds pretty cool. So that is their way to deal with the legality, but only for BD, not CD or DVD, they are unmolested.

And yes that Sony root-kit crap in the early 2000's was very big brother-ish. Scary stuff.

For the OP, media library maintenance is part of the fun, well, sort of fun anyway.

Fortunately for me I was a computer professional before retiring. Consequently I had CD burners (late 80's) when the blanks were inserted into a caddy and then into the burner. Of course I made some copies and compilations. I've had them long enough to know that CD-R's have a finite life span. In my experience the older CD-R's can be relied on to last about 5 to 7 years and no longer. I wouldn't give newer ones much longer. I have been getting very good results with black Maxell CD-R's. Plus they make me think of LP's.

To throw my 2 cents in if I may,

Being an IT professional by trade I also follow the multi drive concept of storing my ripped music. I use a combination of eSata & NAS Drives of various sizes to accomplish the task. A favorite place of mine to pick up such equipment is www.newegg.com.

In my own configuration I use a small application called "Securecopy" from a company named Scriptlogicfound here:

http://www.scriptlogic.com/products/securecopy/

Basically this application offers software based replication that you can schedule within a friendly GUI interface between your two (or more) external hard drives. These replication tasks can be scheduled at certain times to perform the backup process from one drive to the other. This application has many other powerful features as well if you choose to use them.

The benefit of using such an application is that it offers CRC level verification that the file was copied correctly between the two devices. Another benefit is that it will continue the copying task even if it runs into issues on certain files along the way. There nothing worse then kicking off a large copy task before you go to bed only to find out that it stopped 10 min's into the job after you walked away to ask if your sure that you want to perform something.

For those that don't wish to spend any money on such an application there are free options available also. Microsoft offers there

Quote:
Yes, it can be a headache but it's easier with a Mac & the various add-on programs that come with iTunes. Still, I don't trust any hard drive or back - up. Gimme the old fashioned solid kind of music storage mediums anytime.

My problem with my iMAC is that I have now way to completely erase deleted files...On my PC I have something called window washer that will scrub the free space on the hard drive beyond even a DOD or NSA cleaning to remove all those files one has deleted but that still exist on the drive...I have no idea how to do that with a MAC and I know my computer will some day end up on the junk pile so I really want to remove data as much as I want to keep it...

Quote:
My problem with my iMAC is that I have now way to completely erase deleted files...On my PC I have something called window washer that will scrub the free space on the hard drive beyond even a DOD or NSA cleaning to remove all those files one has deleted but that still exist on the drive...I have no idea how to do that with a MAC and I know my computer will some day end up on the junk pile so I really want to remove data as much as I want to keep it...

There's a small Mac program that does what "Window Washer' does but I've forgotten it's name. Ask on http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/ and you should soon get an answer. If you want to double check of old deleted files are still lurking somewhere on your hard drive instal 'Google Desktop'. If that doesn't dig up a file it's gone forever.

You guys that are on PC and don't use foobar oughta be horsewhipped.

Itunes? Bloated, clunky garbage.

Plus foobar can look any way you want it to.. mine is here