Just checking the way I archive, rip, and listen to the music that passes through my computer. It should be noted that these procedures are with maximum quality and tradability in mind. I figure that some of you are the most anal music traders out there, and because of this, you might be able to help me improve my methods a bit. I aspire to become as anal with my music as my budget allows. Some specs first: I have an E-Machine with a 160 GB hardrive, a 3.33 Ghz Intel Celeron Processor, and a DVD+RW dual layer drive (40x compatable).
Ripping:
EAC->Wav->Traders Little Helper
-With TLH I, convert to flac (level 6), create flac fingerprint files, and check for SBE (pretty much in that order)
Tagging: Abander Tag Control (I don't change any tags on material I receive that I may intend to trade again)
Archiving: I burn DVD data discs using Nero 6.6, preserving material in the exact state I received it, including text files, fingerprints (or md5s), and starting today I decided to keep the torrent file as well.
Playing: I have my computer hooked to my stereo through the earphone jack that the computer speakers hook into. I also have split this main connection to include the computer speakers as well with a y jack. This gives me a four speaker set up that I think sounds pretty decent ( I can't wait till I have enough money to obtain a sub-woofer and set up a 6 speaker system).
I use regular old winamp (free version) with plugins that allow for SHN and Flac playback.
Whew...
Now my main questions:
1. I can't seem to make winamp crossfade between tracks with any consistency or satisfaction. This is most annoying with my lossless music. What is the best way to configure Winamp to crossfade seamlessly, or, is there a better free player out there?
2. When I listen to a Flac file I notice a difference in the Kbps that are played back as opposed to a WAV or SHN file (which play back at higher bitrates). Is it worth the time to decode flacs before listening?
3. When archiving, how do you guys keep track of specific show information that you have so you can quickly know if you can help someone out (not just with a specific date, but maybe a specific source as well).
That's about it for now (I'm sure I'll think of some more later). Any feedback is appreciated.
Quote1. I can't seem to make winamp crossfade between tracks with any consistency or satisfaction. This is most annoying with my lossless music. What is the best way to configure Winamp to crossfade seamlessly, or, is there a better free player out there?
DL itunes, it has seamless playback and will sound better. It is also free.
Quote2. When I listen to a Flac file I notice a difference in the Kbps that are played back as opposed to a WAV or SHN file (which play back at higher bitrates). Is it worth the time to decode flacs before listening?
In my expert, anal opinion, yes. the higher bit rate sounds better and has more depth imo. I run a digital cable out of my PC (and my notebook also, I have 2 different systems set up) through the line out jack. It sounds better anbd allows me to use the PC speakers as well, which creates a 8 speaker system for my desktop. I have the PC speakers adjacent to my PC. The sub woofer sits behind me. The remaining speakers are positioned around my room. As for converting to WAV, I think it makes a difference.
Quote3. When archiving, how do you guys keep track of specific show information that you have so you can quickly know if you can help someone out (not just with a specific date, but maybe a specific source as well).
I use microsoft access (database application). I keep track of the band, show, source, circulation date, format, personel notes I made regarding the show's quality, DB.etree.org. link, orignal torrent link or Snail mail source.
Hello, my name is phan and I have a organizational problem.
Quote from: phan003 on October 03, 2006, 10:03:17 PM
Quote1. I can't seem to make winamp crossfade between tracks with any consistency or satisfaction. This is most annoying with my lossless music. What is the best way to configure Winamp to crossfade seamlessly, or, is there a better free player out there?
DL itunes, it has seamless playback and will sound better. It is also free.
While I would normally agree in recommending iTunes, it does not play lossless files other than WAV, AIFF, and Apple Lossless. Therefore, his need for a solution to play FLAC/SHN files seamlessly will not be satiated...
I understand that. I also recommended converting to wav. thus itunes would suffice.
heh, and use up 40% more disk space? even i, the Apple nut of the place, wouldn't do that just to use iTunes...
First off, for your own stuff it's okay, but don't expect to trade the EAC'd files. You should be trading the source that is in the database. True, there are EAC'd sources out there, but usually only when that's the only thing available. So for stuff you rip and convert to a lossless type, you really don't need any fingerprint file or anything. At that point, since they won't be traded, go ahead ond use apple lossless and itunes.
Since I don't have the equipment to do transfers, and don't have any discs that don't exist, i just store what I download right away, and in all honesty, that's what everyone should do. That's the one step and the best way in the future to give back. Just burn that download right to disc.
Then what you do with what you downloaded is up to you. Encode to whatever you want, use whatever program you like best (which I know is iTunes :wink:), and be happy. I'm anal and encode them all to apple lossless after modifying the text file and renaming the files and setting their tags in iTunes. Then I burn the tours in chronological order.
I keep a list in Filemaker, but used excel previously. It has the source and what disc it's archived on, the setlist, notes, and a few other things to track where I am on certain projects with the music.
But really, do whatever you want and let us know how it turns out. It's good to know what works for people.
J
Thanks for all the advice. I don't know why I didn't think of Microsoft Access, we use it in the Anthropology dept. at school to catalogue artifacts. I have always been a little suspicious of itunes, mostly because of the restrictions that friends of mine have found when trying to play back music on their i-pods. I use a Sandisk m250 2GB mp3 player, although, buying a new portable player that can play flac files is, yet, another investment on the horizon (and another opprotunity to practice my negotiating skills with the wife). Then I will be done with mp3 forever.
Quote from: jephrey on October 03, 2006, 10:54:06 PM
First off, for your own stuff it's okay, but don't expect to trade the EAC'd files. You should be trading the source that is in the database. True, there are EAC'd sources out there, but usually only when that's the only thing available. So for stuff you rip and convert to a lossless type, you really don't need any fingerprint file or anything. At that point, since they won't be traded, go ahead ond use apple lossless and itunes.
I got called out on this pertaining to some advice I gave yesterday. http://week4paug.net/index.php/topic,4197.15.html
Upon further review, I totally agree. I now save everything just how I received it, BEFORE I do any conversion to suit my system/players/etc. Ultimately it is this archive that I will be keeping track of. Thanks again for all the advice. If anyone else has anything to add, I'm all ears.
^ we would of given you shit anyway :wink: :evil:
all new paugers get hazed,
watch out for aug he likes to spank peeps and listen to BBFCFM while spanking
You should figure out a way to do an A/B test of FLAC playback vs. WAV playback, I really don't think there will be a noticeable difference.
Also, why are you guys adding extra speakers for your playback? You only have 2 ears, and the more speakers you have the more likely you are to be creating some form of phasing/time smear issues.
Flac playback, seamless, free, and independent of any major corporation (winamp is owned by aol): http://www.foobar2000.org/
Then, go here http://foosion.foobar2000.org/0.9/ and get the "stable components package" which is a bundle of plugins for foobar that includes a stellar plugin that simplifies tagging flacs for live shows (given a txt file that is formatted reasonably.)
It's not fancy looking but you want to play flacs not look at them, right?
I think the more speakers is for more volume (as long as the source can power it. Especially if they're hooked in parallel) I don't think there's an issue with phasing/smearing in a 20x20 room but I could be wrong. I suppose it has to do with the acoustics of the room too. I am sure all the cables will be within a few feet of length with each other too.
J
Even in a small room, with multiple sets of speakers you could be creating phase cancellation/time smear problems.
The fact that you're even considering phase cancellation/time smear problems tells me that your IQ is way higher than mine. Therefore, I am going to keep my mouth shut.
QuoteEven in a small room, with multiple sets of speakers you could be creating phase cancellation/time smear problems.
I guess that person would have to consider the volume benefits over the loss of "quality".
I'm curious now, are vehicles subject to that in some way? Most heads, being only stereo, power 2-3 speakers per channel. Are the speakers just matched better? And when you replace say, your rear speakers, are you more subject to problems?
J
I'd bet that most car companies have some audio pro look at the position of their speakers - unlike Joe Listener who would just plop 2 (or 4) speakers on a desk and assume everything is gonna be fine.
if you want volume, use a clean amp, clean speakers, and turn the knob clockwise.
Quote from: mattstick on October 04, 2006, 12:24:49 PM
You should figure out a way to do an A/B test of FLAC playback vs. WAV playback, I really don't think there will be a noticeable difference.
Also, why are you guys adding extra speakers for your playback? You only have 2 ears, and the more speakers you have the more likely you are to be creating some form of phasing/time smear issues.
I enjoy surround sound. I just positioned the speakers so they surround me. As far as phasing, I have yet to hear any of that. I have a small room, and the speakers are equal distance from the PC (give or take a inch).
live recordings are rarely in surround sound.
Quote from: rowjimmy on October 04, 2006, 04:02:35 PM
live recordings are rarely in surround sound.
that is correct sir. I usually prefer a good album during the day time, and I save the shows for my ipod, and driving time. I never stated that I listen to phish with this setup. I think it makes the sound of the show kind of flat. I prefer the ipod for phish shows, it allows me to concentrate on the music more. Plus I like to fall asleep to phish.
Quote from: rowjimmy on October 04, 2006, 12:54:21 PM
Flac playback, seamless, free, and independent of any major corporation (winamp is owned by aol): http://www.foobar2000.org/
Then, go here http://foosion.foobar2000.org/0.9/ and get the "stable components package" which is a bundle of plugins for foobar that includes a stellar plugin that simplifies tagging flacs for live shows (given a txt file that is formatted reasonably.)
It's not fancy looking but you want to play flacs not look at them, right?
Perfect. Exactly what I was looking for. Works just like what I wanted. I have my speakers set up on a four channel system. I do notice a "fuller" sound when I set them up this way. I might be fooling myself, but it sounds good to my ears.
Quote from: jephrey on October 04, 2006, 01:12:49 PM
I think the more speakers is for more volume (as long as the source can power it. Especially if they're hooked in parallel) I don't think there's an issue with phasing/smearing in a 20x20 room but I could be wrong. I suppose it has to do with the acoustics of the room too. I am sure all the cables will be within a few feet of length with each other too.
J
Ok....this is a common misconception. ANY time you have more than one source point for directed energy, if the source points are NOT aligned on the same axis, you will have time smear, ring modulation, amplitude modulation, freq. modulation, dead spots, "loud" spots, early reflections, etc.....all the bad things you don't want to have heappening to sound (Matty hit this right on the head). ESPECIALLY if you are trying to create a quasi-quad setup (5/6/7.1 does not apply due to the delay that the amp adds to reconstruct "room acoustics"). Quad is a BITCH to configure. Think about this.....in a quad system, you have 4 source points. These 4 source points have to be ABSOLUTELY lined on the X-Y vector axis, and ABSOLUTELY square. Even a misalignment of say....1/4" on any of the points (the tolerances for proper acoustical reproduction are SO miniscule its silly....1/4" is a MASSIVE ammount) will result in any of the above mentioned sound colorations......
If you've ever seen the inside of a major studio control room, have you ever noticed the monitors?.......ever wonder why they are always laying on their side?......ever closely examine a studio monitor and notice that the drivers are as close to being absolutely flush as possible?....There's a reason they are set up like this.....it's to avoid these issues. There are ways to treat a room if you can't set up a perfect setup. Ok, I'm beginning to ramble......back to what I was saying......
Having more speakers does NOT equal a louder system. This is a common misconception. If you have 100watts, that's all you got. Period. You can put 100watts into 200 speakers, and it will not play any louder than it would if it came from one. As a matter of fact, it would prolly HURT the performance more than anything due to the lovely rules stated by Ohms Law.....Adding more resistance requires more power to drive the speaker to the same db level output......this is basic speaker wiring..... 4ohm + 4ohm can either equal 2ohms (in parallel) or 16ohms (in series).......The lower that load is, the higher the current can be driving the load.
In other words.....to get more decibles, you need more current. The more current you have available, the harder you can drive a speaker, and thus get more db's out of it.....and of course, you all know that getting a +3db gain in output requires DOUBLE the power.....
dB (SPL) Source
194 Theoretical limit for a sound wave at 1 atmosphere environmental pressure
180 Rocket engine at 30 meters
171 Current SPL record for a IASCA Competition
120 Threshold of pain
80 Vacuum cleaner at 1 m
50 Quiet restaurant inside
0 Threshold of human hearing
* It takes an amplifier twice the power to produce an increase of +3 dB.
* It usually takes about 2-3 dB for a human to perceive a difference in a sound level.
* It takes +10 dB for a human to percieve a doubling of the sound level.
Smeared: Lacking detail. Poor transient response, too much leakage between microphones. Poorly focused images.
Muddy: Not clear. Weak harmonics, smeared time response, I.M. distortion.
That is all...
My "louder" statement was based on having underpowered speakers. If you can pump out more than the speakers can handle, adding more speakers allows you to use the wattage of the head more effectively. However, you decrease your power output if you run the speakers in parallel for the ohms law reason you stated.
So, I understand the concept that adding speakers doesn't matter.
As for the quasi-quad setup, after reading your explanation and thinking about it, you're right on. Even 1/16 inch is huge sound wise, you wouldn't even be able to move your head if you want to retain the same sound quality.
Does that same idea apply to vehicles? I have a 7-speaker system. If the 3 speakers on the right side are playing the exact thing and I'm different distances from each, there's a potential problem right? Luckily, a vehicle isn't a soundroom.
J
marmar and mattstick,
you guys suck :wink:
I always think have my stuff (shows, audio setup) sounding really good, and now I'm paranoid that it proboly sounds like shit to you guys. :lol:
/me does'nt feel pain until 140dB
8-)
A good pair of headphones always helps to balance things out, right? No guessing about how to arrange your speakers, just plop them on your head and go. That's a subject for further debate.
Well put Mar. Clearly I couldn't go into such detail with authority but that's all behind what i meant when I said:
Quote from: rowjimmy on October 04, 2006, 02:56:19 PM
if you want volume, use a clean amp, clean speakers, and turn the knob clockwise.
Although I didn't address placement :wink:
Quote from: nab on October 05, 2006, 06:43:22 PM
A good pair of headphones always helps to balance things out, right? No guessing about how to arrange your speakers, just plop them on your head and go. That's a subject for further debate.
Yeah, we can go on for pages on "good" headphones. But, to a degree and, with exceptions, they tend to be a "get what you pay for" sort of thing.
Also, headphones is so different from a properly spaced pair of monitors. Ask Marmar or Matt if they ever 'master' with headphones on.
Quote from: jephrey on October 05, 2006, 05:15:06 PM
Does that same idea apply to vehicles? I have a 7-speaker system. If the 3 speakers on the right side are playing the exact thing and I'm different distances from each, there's a potential problem right? Luckily, a vehicle isn't a soundroom.
Vehicles are a totally different beast. Angled reflective surfaces.....that's all I gotta say about vehicles. But as far as phasing in a vehicle. Yes, you are correct....to a degree. Usually, in a "decent" car stereo, the speakers are aligned on at least one (sometimes 2) of the 4 axis. Usually, your front door and rear door speakers are on axis. The same holds true for dash and rear deck speakers. The major reason behind why the timing issues are usually so small you don't notice them is the effective volume of the listening area. The smaller the volume of the area, the less you'll notice time smear issues......plus, since the angled reflective surfaces of the car interior act as bass traps (I'll explain in a moment) you don't notice phasing issues. My truck had a total of 11 speakers.....yes, 11.....and I broke every single rule regarding their placement.....becasue in a small space like that you can
bend those rules without the major consiquences.
About the "bass traps" of a car interior. Bass waves are enormous. Really.....they are. You can be standing next to a sub pumping 90db and not hear a damn thing, but back away 20-30 feet and suddenly it feels like you're being kicked in the chest.......The interior of a car acts like a bass trap becasue of the angled surfaces and absorbing surfaces. There simply isn't enough room inside a vehicle to create a standing wave below 125-150Hz. All those angles also help smear the time relations of the speakers. Driver position is also the key thing.....you aren't sitting in the middle of the car, so no matter what getting proper balance is tricky.....but this also works to your advantage in a car becasue you are so close to one set of drivers.....so their sound goes outward towards the passengers side (if you are the driver) and reflects back to you from the windows.......this delay time is almost close enough to provide a stereo reflection back at your ears.......couple that with the reflected energy from the other speakers, and the smear is so great that your ears can't tell
what is going on or where it is coming from.
And this goes back to the headphones......you NEVER want to try and do complete mastering with headphones. They are great for editing, tracking and the like, but NOT for mastering. You are tricking your ears with headphones. You can create a nearly PERFECT stereo mix with amazing balance, tonality, and spread with headphones on, only to play it back on a set of monitors to find out the 30+ hrs you spent working on a track were for nothing becasue of the spread being too wide.....or you notice a suddon spike in freq at or near a speaker crossover point......but the converse doesn't hold true........If you make a killer mix on a set of near/mid-field monitors, 9 out of 10 times it will sound just as good on a set of headphones.......or even better.
Sound manipulation is a very tricky thing......there are so many variables that it's almost impossible to stay on top of them all......
You ever notice on a day with high humidity that bass is extended (thicker sounding) and highs get muddied? Ever notice that day sets sound TOTALLY different than night sets?
Heh....ok, I need to quit rambling and go over this list of 1996-1998 DAT FOB's.....
Quote from: Marmar on October 06, 2006, 11:06:00 AM
You ever notice on a day with high humidity that bass is extended (thicker sounding) and highs get muddied? Ever notice that day sets sound TOTALLY different than night sets?
There is some relationship between this and the sensation I get when I listen to the Siket Disc version of "What's The Use". It makes me think of being well stoned on a hot, sticky, Virginia day and walking along the concourse at a show listening to the unnatural sounds of a sick, sick, jam...
Thanks for the lesson mar.
j
Quote from: jephrey on October 06, 2006, 04:13:55 PM
Thanks for the lesson mar.
j
that wasn't a lesson, it was a
schooling! :evil:
thanks for schooling my ass :samurai:
J
school is in SESSION!
Dont buy anything they sell at Walmart.
Quote from: birdman on December 17, 2010, 07:55:12 PM
Dont buy anything they sell at Walmart.
Wow, sweet bump.