|
Articles and Reviews
|
The Apple iPod – Part 3 Ripping Methods & Workflow
When one finally decides to join the compressed music file bandwagon, one discovers that there’s a whole culture and society devoted to the process and that this process is as neurotic as any other hobby or craft that a person may have an interest in. While I say “compressed” there are also file formats that aren’t compressed at all and offer full CD quality sound at the expense of very large file sizes that would kill a dial-up connection if attempting to download any number of such files. The usual file type for this format is WAVE (or WAV), which is a Microsoft Windows audio format originally meant for speech recording – an ironic analogy is that the now obsolete cassette tape was originally created by Philips as a dictation recording medium, which got co-opted into a music medium because of its low cost. On the Apple Mac side of things, AIFF is the full resolution file type and when comparing AIFF and WAVE, file sizes are the same, as is the bit rate of 1411 kbps. As with WAVE, AIFF files do not offer tag information that is so convenient and useful with MP3 and other compressed files. Because of the large file sizes and lack of tag ability of WAVE and AIFF, lossless file formats were developed. OGG Vorbis and FLAC are the two major third-party file formats with FLAC (free lossless audio codec) being open source, so that developers can continue to improve upon the codec, as well as come out with better sounding players. There are varying levels of compression available with FLAC, but a zero compression setting will still result in a file 2/3 the size of WAVE files. FLAC represents a nice alternative to WAVE/AIFF because one can create a compressed MP3 file from a FLAC file and have all the relevant tag information available. From the two major hardware and software vendors of Microsoft and Apple, there is WMA Lossless and Apple Lossless. Both of which offer smaller file sizes about half that of WAVE with tag information, but without much hardware support at this time. Apple Lossless is compatible with the iPod, which is good, but with no other device, which is bad. At this time, Apple Lossless, which is based on the MPEG 4 format, is too proprietary for me to take seriously. WMA Lossless is similar in having little hardware support, but as with Apple Lossless, creating such file types is simple and quick using either Windows Media Player or iTunes respectively. I vacillated back and forth between WMA Lossless and AIFF before choosing something else altogether. Within the compressed file format world, there is MP3, which started it all off and is still king, but now it’s been joined by WMA and ACC, which have huge resources and money behind them from Microsoft and Apple. In fact,
some of the download sites that sell music, only offer WMA files and at iTunes, you can only buy
ACC files. I’ve purchased a handful of WMA files from Puretracks,
which is
Most people know about MP3, but probably most have not heard what a good MP3 file can really sound like. As mentioned above, all the online services offer lower quality 128 bit rate files and in terms of what’s available from the world wide web, there can be even worse quality files available. It may be free, but you get what you pay for J For the record, I have never participated in peer-to-peer trading of music files because I never fancied the concept of letting thousands of online strangers access to my folders. High compression MP3 files became popular because file sizes could be minimized so that those using dial-up connections could actually download files reasonably well, but of course, some people could not leave well enough alone. We don’t just have the ability to increase the bit rate for superior sound quality, we can also use variable bit rates, so that the bit rate changes as the music changes and increases when the music requires higher resolution. It sounds a lot like Krell’s active biasing in their power amps, which attempts to always provide class A power without the huge amounts of heat and power that a normal class A amp would require for a given wattage. The now ancient Krell KSA 250 power amp was one known to act as a space heater for its owners, whereas the KSA 300 dramatically reduced the heat with the new biasing circuit. The bias changes as the music changes and when the music signal is low-level, the bias reduces the amount of power and hence the heat from the amp. While Krell amps have always been large and heavy, the biasing circuit allows the amp to be far less monstrous and hot than if Krell had continued to build pure class A monsters. Class A amps run full out 100% of the time regardless of whether or not there is a signal to amplify, which is why they generate so much heat, but also why they sound so good compared to class B amps, which are far more efficient because they switch on and off depending on the music signal, but sound quality is not as sweet. Most good amps run hybrid class A/B, in which the amp runs in pure class A for the first few watts before switching to class B as the music demands more power. Anyway, while full bit rate MP3 files will create modestly large files, it will still be much smaller than a lossless or WAVE file. Typically, a 320 bit rate MP3 will be a quarter the size of a WAVE file and to most people’s ears, will sound just as good. With those file types swirling in my head, I also had to be aware of what kinds of files my iPod will support. With a desire for simplicity and speed in mind to rip the nearly 500 CDs in my collection, I initially thought that iTunes and AIFF would be what I would use. I wanted an archival file type for posterity and one that could be used for compression to another format. Keeping in mind that AIFF is basically a WAVE file with a different extension, when one rips a CD to MP3, most applications actually need to create a temporary WAVE file, which is used to create a MP3. One would have all the quality that one needs in AIFF/WAVE for compressing to whatever they wished. File sizes for the AIFF files were of no concern to me with the desktop system having plenty of storage. I estimated that converting all my CDs to AIFF and having a duplicate set of MP3s would probably fit on one 300 GB drive, which I happen to have four of. I even ripped about 50 CDs that took up 24 GB of space before I put a full stop to the process and reconsidered if I really wanted over 200 GB of AIFF files. As I said, it wasn’t because of storage space, but I had to consider that many if not most of the AIFF files in the collection would be larger than the buffer size of the iPod, which I understand to be only 28 MB. The larger the file size over the buffer, the more the iPod has to access the hard drive, which means more spinning and heat, ergo, potentially shorter hard drive life. (I’m astounded about how far we’ve come in such a short time. Back in 1989 when I bought my first PC, it came with a whopping 20 MB hard drive. Today, we have tiny devices with buffers larger than that first hard drive and flash memory that can hold a GB of data in a card the size of a stamp) Then there was the practical consideration of AIFF having very minimal information related to the file. Unlike MP3, which has tag information capability built-in, AIFF and WAVE files do not. One can create what are known as cue sheets to workaround the tag problem, but I had no desire to do that kind of extra work. Remember, I want speed and simplicity for my ripping workflow. After ripping and compressing various different file formats, I finally decided that AIFF wasn’t worth the trouble and settled on FLAC as my archival format. I can playback FLAC files directly with Winamp and if I really want a portable player for the FLAC files, I can get a Rio Karma. Very conveniently, creating a MP3 from a FLAC file retains the tag info. With the archival format finally decided, the next step was deciding on how I would compress those FLAC files to something usable with the iPod. There was never any doubt in my mind that it would not be MP3 given its universal support. The question was which MP3 format? There’s no way I’d waste my time with the low grade 128 bit rate compression and even a higher “CD quality” 192 bit rate was lacking just that tiny bit compared to 320 bit rate. That would seem to be the end of it, but it isn’t, because the cognoscenti all suggested that I compress using the LAME codec. LAME you say? At a minimum of 250 kbps and variable bit rate using the Alt Preset-Extreme setting in the command line. Command line? What the heck, isn’t that like DOS? Well, yes it is, but no, one didn’t have to go back in time to the C prompt and the 640 kb memory barrier, because various third party ripping applications have popped up with built-in LAME support. You just need to have the LAME engine available on your hard drive and point the ripping application to it, so that it can call it when creating the MP3 file. The audio geeks all say that LAME is the best way to create a MP3 file. Again, who am I to go against the grain, but there was just one little fly in the ointment. I couldn’t hear any difference between a regular 320 bit rate MP3 versus one created using LAME. It was, well, a lame experience…sorry J There is also a little matter of how I’d be using those MP3 files, namely in a portable device on my workday commute. As I tend to sit at the back of the bus, often times I find myself on the rearmost seat, not more than a few feet away from the diesel engine. Even if I could hear a difference between a regular high bit rate MP3 versus a LAME MP3, it would be lost on me due to my commute. However, the times that I can listen in relative silence, I’d like to treat my ears to good quality files without going overboard in using compression methods that are more theoretical than practical. Workflow Once I had the file formats figured out, FLAC for archiving and 320 bit rate MP3 for portable use, I needed to find the right application and workflow to get through the hundreds of CDs in my collection. Gawd, I’d hate to think of the workload if I had continued my 1990s rate of purchasing till now. I’d be faced with ripping thousands of CDs. Both Yoda and another friend big into high-quality ripping were recommending EAC (Exact Audio Copy) for creating MP3 files because it can call up the LAME engine. I tried it, but didn’t really care for the speed and workflow and when I found the LAME files to be no different than regular 320 bit rate files, I went looking for something else, much to the horror of my friend who speaks of EAC in reverential terms. The latest version of EAC also didn’t work on my desktop, which would be my main ripping machine. LG DVD burners are suppose to work really well with EAC, but for some reason, EAC could not detect my either of my LG drives. It worked perfectly fine, if slow, on my Toshiba notebook. I tried and then bought Easy CD-DA Extractor as my ripping application. It has built in FLAC support and if I really wanted to, I can compress to LAME MP3 files too. The workflow is as simple as I desired and it’s fast too. My workflow has me loading both DVD/CD drives with CDs. I rip one and then click on the drive menu to select the second drive to rip the second CD immediately. While the second CD rips, I change CDs in the first drive and continue the back and forth swapping of CDs and drives. This helps to minimize my time and reduces the workload of each drive, so that they get breaks between rips. With this process, I can rip close to 30 CDs in an hour.
Easy CD-DA Extractor automatically accesses a database of CD information over the Internet as soon as I load a CD into the drive. I then click on the “Select” button to select all the tracks then “Copy.” Very simple and efficient. I use to rip just selected tracks for a given CD back in the WMA days, but now I just rip everything because why skimp when there’s plenty of space? On first use for ripping CDs, I set Easy CD-DA to rip FLAC files from its menu of file formats available. I select the hard drive and folder I want the files to be saved to and I ensure that the metadata option is checked off. In my specified music folder, each new album has its own new folder created by Easy CD-DA and the FLAC files are saved there. It’s a more straightforward way to organize the albums than the way iTunes did with the AIFF files I created.
After creating the FLAC files, I can use Easy CD-DA Extractor to convert them to MP3 files, as seen below:
iTunes does some things that tend to make sense when you think about it, but ultimately is not satisfactory for the way I’d want my albums organized. For example, I was ripping Neil Young’s two-disc Decade set to AIFF and in reviewing the list of tracks, I noticed that Track 17 was missing from disc 2. As I discovered, Track 17 had been ripped but placed in its own folder because iTunes considered the artist to be Neil Young and Crazy Horse instead of just Neil Young. Now a few mouse clicks could get me a different sorting of the files and have everything looking okay, but it’s still not what I wanted in the first place. No such worries with Easy CD-DA and no generic Compilations folder that whole albums disappear into as with iTunes. iTunes is still a very clean and elegant way to playback music, but I don’t have a choice in using it, as I’m forced to use it in order to get music files loaded on the iPod. It’s unfortunate that I couldn’t just highlight and drag files back and forth as you can when using the iPod as a hard drive, but the hard drive mode does not provide access to the music folders. Part 4 Listening to Ripped files & Headphones Update: in a fit of flip-flopping, I've returned to AIFF for archiving my CDs, because of its ease of creation via iTunes and compatibility with the iPod. I think I've also figured out why there are times when I don't hear a difference between a high bit rate MP3 versus CD or AIFF - many pop recordings suck with a lot of them sounding like they were recorded in a garage lined with egg carton foam. |
|
Correspondence & About this website Copyright © 1998-2008 Edwin Leong |
|
 |
|
