CDS

[Rujah]

i was just wondering how you guys keep your shows, by that I mean do you  have all of them on audio or do you keep them just on cd in flac or shn for trading purposes only, or do you have both audio and data? thanks . peace

[Wolfman]

Madden: Here comes a penalty flag!!

Ref: Inappropriate forum posting...number 89 on the offense...that\'s a 10 yard penalty...repeat 9th post.

Madden:  That penalty\'s going against the rookie Rujah.  He was out of position on that post.  Shoulda been in the Score! forum, or maybe the Spunk forum.  Rookies are gonna make mental errors from time to time, but Rujah is a rookie with a huge upside.  Look for him to make some big posts in the near future.

[freddiewaht]

all audio for me..not sure about anyone else but when i have a show,i prefer to actually be able to hear it..

[leith]

Originally posted by freddiewaht
all audio for me..not sure about anyone else but when i have a show,i prefer to actually be able to hear it..

Is this where a SOUND IT ! would come in?

[obsession600]

I burn the shn/flac files to disc and then convert to audio for listening on my iPod.
For really smoking shows I burn an audio copy for keeping at work or sticking in a friend\'s cd player.
Now that I have a dvd burner I am starting to transfer all the shn/flac to dvd.

[kindm's]

Currently for trading purposes i have been converting to shn / flac. For Archive purposes however Audio is still the way to go because in compressed format a physcial scratch will destroy a larger percentage of music then in uncompressed.

That being said as soon as i get a DVD burner I will burn all my masters to DVD-A for undithered fun


The extraction times and not having to use EAC does make flac / shn an easy choice for storage. I just playback throught my PC at this point anyway

EgoSys Waveterminal -> RCA -> Marantz

[ChrisF]

Originally posted by kindm\'s
For Archive purposes however Audio is still the way to go because in compressed format a physcial scratch will destroy a larger percentage of music then in uncompressed.
 

Thats BS. Its easier to read a lightly scratched data disc than an audio disc, . If the scratch is really bad you will lose more information if its a FLAC disc, but if you are archiving you should be taking better care of your discs than that.

[galenas]

wolf, you crack me up!  (i know, i know... GET A ROOM)

[kindm's]

ChrisF,

You say what I said is BS but then prove my point.

"If the scratch is really bad you will lose more information if its a FLAC disc."

That was exactly my point.

Taking care of ones media has nothing to do with which format is better for archival purposes. I agree that for convenience and for maintaining the lineage FLAC / SHN are superior but in the true sense of archiving, Audio is the way to go because you could always recover more of the audio if it became damaged. Other than that neither 1 is a great format because they don\'t have much shelf life

[ChrisF]

Originally posted by kindm\'s
ChrisF,

You say what I said is BS but then prove my point.

I have had some badly scratched SHN discs and tried to copy them to the hard drive and they verified. i have also had audio discs that were barely even scratched and i could not read them with EAC without getting errors. sometimes it even happens when there are no scratches at all. Extracting audio from an audio disc is always going to be more sensitive than copying SHN or FLAC files over from a data disc. I guess its hard to compare since every disc is probably treated differently, but out of the thousands of SHN and FLAC discs i have burned i have never had a problem reading any of them. Its pretty rare that to need to make a copy of an audio disc because i save all my SHNs and FLACs, but even though i may only use EAC to copy 5 or 10 audio discs a year i still have more problems with audio than i do with SHN or FLAC.

[kindm's]

Your point is well taken and I agree with you %100. Dealing with the Audio files is a big pain in the ass and ALOT more sensitive as you pointed out. hence why we all are using FLAC /SHN

I would say the argument of Audio vs. FLAC /SHN in regards to archiving has only the one benefit of potential recovery of a PHYSICAL problem. other than that FLAC / SHN make a hell of a lot more sense to me. I have begun switching all the CDR\'s I have to SHN / FLAC but the majority of them have a DAT copy so I am not as concerned with those as I am my 24 Bit masters still on HDD

ChrsF,
do you know if EAC can be used to extract audio from DVD\'s ? or anyone,?

[davepeck]

mike - are you referring to DVD Audio or DVD Video discs??

if you want to rip an audio track from a dvd video disc, it\'s not as easy as EAC.. however, there is a program out there called \'dvd audio ripper\' that makes it pretty easy..

[obsession600]

Since so many shows are widely spread among so many people I worry a lot less now about discs getting damaged etc. Of course I don\'t own any masters.

[kindm's]

Originally posted by davepeck
mike - are you referring to DVD Audio or DVD Video discs??

Dave I was referring to DVD-A. I should know better to be more specific. I ask because very soon I will be making the jump to DVD-A and wanted to know what kind of hassle it is gonna be to reproduce HQ DVD-A\'s for folks without keeping everything on HDD.


I Guess I will just burn an Audio copy and Flac copy on DVD that way I have both. Not as cost effective but I guess it will do. I suppose I could save a 24/..... FLAC copy and a 16/44.1 copy on the same data DVD in order to preserve space and less hassle. Have the DVD-A for HQ playback in the system and then an easily retrievable copy in both bit depths