3000 CD's To Rip - Why Not Just Record Them All To DSD With This Instead?

[Kal Rubinson]

49 minutes ago, SJK said:

I see references to the use of a RAID etc. for data storage.  I just have a lot of copies in different places.  With over 1,000 CD's (at 14.4/16) ripped and about 1,500 recorded LPs (at 24/96) all that music will fit easily onto a 2 TB drive.  I have two copies at work with my backup drives, one at home for playback, one used for traveling and another my wife has for playback at her office.  

Certainly with only 2Tb of files, backup is much more important than RAID since you can recover from your b/u in a short time. 

 

OTOH, if your collection increases by 10x or more, then RAID becomes equally important since recovery of errors can local and very much faster than recopying the entire collection.

[jabbr]

2 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Certainly with only 2Tb of files, backup is much more important than RAID since you can recover from your b/u in a short time. 

 

OTOH, if your collection increases by 10x or more, then RAID becomes equally important since recovery of errors can local and very much faster than recopying the entire collection.

 

Yes. The reason I mirror my local drives using ZFS is that I run scrubs every few weeks.

 

A few years back I've seen silently corrupted blocks ... the danger is that you get those, and back those up and then you've backup up your corrupted data. With ZFS (and checksums) you ensure data integrity ... probably more important for family photos and you can checksum without ZFS but you need to know what you are doing.

 

Its all free with Ubuntu Linux

[StephenJK]

2 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

Yes. The reason I mirror my local drives using ZFS is that I run scrubs every few weeks.

 

A few years back I've seen silently corrupted blocks ... the danger is that you get those, and back those up and then you've backup up your corrupted data. With ZFS (and checksums) you ensure data integrity ... probably more important for family photos and you can checksum without ZFS but you need to know what you are doing.

 

Its all free with Ubuntu Linux

I'm not a Linux user.  I have two 4 TB eSATA drives as the main backup for my music files.  I use a commercial program called SyncBack Pro to mirror the drives to each other.  I don't know if that would catch any file changes or degradation.  Stick with this or go to a RAID setup?  Maybe this should be the start of another topic?

[jaspal kallar]

6 hours ago, SJK said:

I just have a lot of copies in different places.  With over 1,000 CD's (at 14.4/16) ripped and about 1,500 recorded LPs (at 24/96) all that music will fit easily onto a 2 TB drive.  I have two copies at work with my backup drives, one at home for playback, one used for traveling and another my wife has for playback at her office.

 

 

 

Great advice.   I have copies everywhere. although I've only 500 ripped CD's:

 

- 2 external USB disks (when ripping cd's)

- 2 external firmware disks (as part of of Imac backup with CCC and timemachine)

- 1 Internal HD drive of my Nuc roon server,

-  iTunes (Imac) 

- Just ordered a 256 GB SDXC card which I will use in my macbook air -- which just about fits my 500 ripped cd's 

 

[Kal Rubinson]

3 hours ago, jaspal kallar said:

Great advice.   I have copies everywhere. although I've only 500 ripped CD's:

- 2 external USB disks (when ripping cd's)

- 2 external firmware disks (as part of of Imac backup with CCC and timemachine)

- 1 Internal HD drive of my Nuc roon server,

-  iTunes (Imac) 

- Just ordered a 256 GB SDXC card which I will use in my macbook air -- which just about fits my 500 ripped cd's 

All at home? ?

[Rexp]

20 hours ago, Condocondor said:

So, I've not read this whole thread.  I didn't have time.  But, I've just downloaded JRiver 24 and tried an experiment:  I ripped a regular redbook CD "Raising Sand" by Allison Kraus and Robert Plant to both FLAC and DSD64 and played them side by side.  Now my DAC is an iFi Micro iDSD Black Label which handles DSD natively which might make a difference then if your DAC uses an AKM or SABRE  chip implementation. 

The results were very interesting.  The FLAC files seemed to be recorded at a higher volume than the DSD64 so I had to adjust volume upwards for comparison.  For me it was a no contest.  The CD ripped to DSD64 was noticeably smoother than FLAC file and more spacious sounding too.  I could listen with much less fatigue and greater enjoyment.  So....disc space be damned from here on out. 

I listen on my laptop exclusively with a DAC/AMP and higher end headphones.  I learned something really great here:  Rip CD's to DSD64 or higher if you want a smooth listen and want to get the most out of your redbook CD's.

Anyone else tried this? 

[jaspal kallar]

19 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

All at home? ?

No.  

 

Imac plus it's two external backup firewire HD's and the NUC (with an internal HHD) are at home.

 

The rest are in an external storage place (along with few of my other belongings).  

 

However, saying that, I'm abroad, so, everything is in storage now except one external USB HD & SDXC card which I've taken on my travels.  

 

[beerandmusic]

On 11/26/2018 at 9:42 PM, Rexp said:

Anyone else tried this? 

When i first fell in love with DSD, i wouldn't listen to anything but native DSD for months......much was recorded offline with Korg Audiogate. 

 

INRE TOPIC:  I would rip everything to wav files using dbpoweramp (shows verification)...well worth the small price tag.  You can decide later if/how much you want to convert to DSD later.... you can even batch convert, so it would actually be faster since you can record to wav a lot faster than DSD, and then do batch conversions which won't take operator intervention for each cd.