Jump to content

Ditching the CD collection?

Buzzrock

By Buzzrock
in Music

 Share

Recommended Posts

DoobieWah

DoobieWah 1452

Posted
Posted

Ai think we had this thread on TOS. I ripped mine years ago and about ten years ago I took about 80% of my collection, (450 or so) to a house party and gave them away. People loved it and got stuff they wanted or hadn't heard of.  It was a big hit. Do that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzrock

Buzzrock 14935

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 hours ago, DoobieWah said:

Ai think we had this thread on TOS. I ripped mine years ago and about ten years ago I took about 80% of my collection, (450 or so) to a house party and gave them away. People loved it and got stuff they wanted or hadn't heard of.  It was a big hit. Do that. 

That would have been a pretty good idea. But at 46 I don’t get to many house parties. I suppose I could have given them away at a housewarming party. 

As for the snobs in the thread: it’s cool, I have a few hifi fetishist friends such as yourselves who’ve splurged on speakers the size of refrigerators and speaker cable that looks like garden hose. Listen on whatever makes you happy. Hell I flew 700 miles to buy a car with a particular sound system in it. My old Mirages and my 320 kbps streams will do me fine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
irishtexan

irishtexan 11522

Posted
Posted
On 3/23/2019 at 10:07 AM, MaxHorn said:

My downstairs is filled with about 6,000 CDs and 5,000 LPs. I will NEVER part with them. All of the CDs are in my digital library, which is now over 235,000 songs. I am also (slowly) ripping the obscure vinyl to digital, but it takes forever because I am such an anal-retentive dork and I de-click that shit one pop at a  time. The upside is that the vinyl rips usually sound better than CD releases.

HELP ME. I NEED A MUSICAL INTERVENTION.

I'm having a credenza built with roughly 10 feet of storage for records - six individual two-foot boxes stacked in threes, with tuner stored in middle unit on top. My current collection will fill that about 75% full. I've read you can fit about 65 records per foot of shelving. That would give me 650-700 records at max capacity. When I fill it up completely, it's gonna be time to start purging. With 700 records, I could listen to a full album a day and not repeat for like 18-20 months. That's about as much as I could reasonably expect to listen to in a collection. 

The problem is that my old man's best friend has a collection of multiple thousand LPs he's been collecting since the early 60s and he's indicated they might go to me because he doesn't have any kids. That would present a bit of a problem.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46000

Posted
Posted

Way back when, I was invited to check out the vinyl collection owned by a friend's Dad.  He said I wasn't gonna believe it.

I didn't believe it.  The guy had 2 full walls (plus more) of a fairly large basement crammed full of vinyl, almost all classical from Deutsche Grammophon (which featured a yellow strip on the edge, so there was this longass series of yellow stripes running horizontally across the room).  If vinyl is 65 albums per foot, he must have had 20K albums in his collection.  It was mind-boggling.  I honestly don't even remember his audio setup.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Fuck

Chad Fuck 17698

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Way back when, I was invited to check out the vinyl collection owned by a friend's Dad.  He said I wasn't gonna believe it.

I didn't believe it.  The guy had 2 full walls (plus more) of a fairly large basement crammed full of vinyl, almost all classical from Deutsche Grammophon (which featured a yellow strip on the edge, so there was this longass series of yellow stripes running horizontally across the room).  If vinyl is 65 albums per foot, he must have had 20K albums in his collection.  It was mind-boggling.  I honestly don't even remember his audio setup.

Was this in Lewisville?  

Because if not, he had a twin in Lewisville. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yoladu

yoladu 4094

Posted
Posted
On 3/23/2019 at 10:07 AM, MaxHorn said:

My downstairs is filled with about 6,000 CDs and 5,000 LPs. I will NEVER part with them. All of the CDs are in my digital library, which is now over 235,000 songs. I am also (slowly) ripping the obscure vinyl to digital, but it takes forever because I am such an anal-retentive dork and I de-click that shit one pop at a  time. The upside is that the vinyl rips usually sound better than CD releases.

HELP ME. I NEED A MUSICAL INTERVENTION.

holy shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Not that Bob

Not that Bob 739

Posted
Posted
On 3/23/2019 at 10:07 AM, MaxHorn said:

My downstairs is filled with about 6,000 CDs and 5,000 LPs. I will NEVER part with them. All of the CDs are in my digital library, which is now over 235,000 songs. I am also (slowly) ripping the obscure vinyl to digital, but it takes forever because I am such an anal-retentive dork and I de-click that shit one pop at a  time. The upside is that the vinyl rips usually sound better than CD releases.

HELP ME. I NEED A MUSICAL INTERVENTION.

Care to give me a thumbnail of the equipment and process for transferring LPs to digital?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fuga

Fuga 180

Posted
Posted

Gonna die before I get rid of my 2000+ CDs and 1000+ LPs. But then it might be the wife killing me coz of them. Much/most have been ripped to ALAC (AppleLossless) for playback over network.

Never rip to lossy, even though I can't hear the difference. You can always transcode lossless to lossy but once something is lossy you really do not want to reencode to another bitrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46000

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Fuga said:

Why? Waste of space and potentially more stress on resources when playing, assuming computer/other playback.

What?  What "stress"?  If he has the memory to store all those files, then the decision to rip to WAV is pretty obvious, assuming you're talking about mp3 or similar as an alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fuga

Fuga 180

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

What?  What "stress"?  If he has the memory to store all those files, then the decision to rip to WAV is pretty obvious, assuming you're talking about mp3 or similar as an alternative.

I was referring to processor speed and RAM. Larger the file the more of a hit. Specifically I was comparing WAV/AIFF to FLAC or other lossless. There simply is no reason to have a file so much bigger. They sound the same. Assuming a perfect rip (which takes the same amount of time WAV/AIFF as lossless) FLAC, ALAC, APE are bit perfect. And, yes, transcoding, on the fly, the lossless file for playback does take some resources. The real issue is drive space. Archiving as WAV/AIFF is incredibly rare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fuga

Fuga 180

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Understood -- you're still referring to a lossless format, even though the files are smaller.  I agree.

Do you know if FLAC can be converted to WAV?  I guess it should be theoretically possible.

Most definitely can go back. Same with AIFF (Apple version of WAV). Lossless is simple data compression. FLAC, ALAC, APE do it in their own ways but the data is the same. Lossy MP3, AAC, etc. are conversion schemes that take away some (a lot) of the data in their attempts to retain the sound in the data they keep. Since they take away data and and the data that results is not the same (not the same bits) you can't recreate the original, nor can you go to more or less bitrates. The latter is the second reason for archiving as lossless. At any given moment you may find yourself wanting a lossy version, say to load up your phone/player for a a trip where you will not be able to stream. Say you decide you had done smaller/larger files (lower or higher bitrates). Using lossless as the original file your golden. But if your archive is only whatever bitrate you originally encoded to you're screwed. This is why I cringe whenever someone brags about ripping their entire collection to 320 or whatever.

Sorry, most of that wasn't directly related to your question. Just killing time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...