I need advice from some folks that really understand digital music, libraries, etc

OK so I recently ripped all of my CDs onto my PC.  I even bought a portable external drive with 500G capacity.  I ripped a few (using windows media player defualt settings), and then I realized that was compressing into WMA format, which loses some detail of the music.  I stopped and started over again using WAV format so as to have a more "pure" library.  After doing so, I realized that there is another option out there for "lossless" files and that is FLAC.  The main benefit to FLAC files are that they are about half the size, or so I am told.  I also have discovered that the WAV files never retain the tagging so well.  I found somebody's blog out somewhere where it discusses this.  So my first question is... I want to find the BEST standard format to keep my library.  Should I use FLAC for reduced size AND because the tagging works better?

Ok moving on.  I have another question about how a music library should be organized.  As I rip CDs into my PC using windows media play (default now set to WAV), I notice that it creates folders for each artist, and each album.  So what you end up with is a tree-like file structure in your music folder.  Seems all nice n tidy at first, but actually kind of a pain in the ass when trying to move files, copy to a friend, etc.  I once read an opinion of somebody that this type of file structure is preferred.  I'm not sold.  I think tagging should easily take care of all of this, and the folders are unnecessary.  I found it to be a big hinderance when a buddy at work copied his whole collection onto my drive, and all of his were in one folder (no tags ughhh).  I would like to know if there is somewhat of an industry standard that audiophiles prefer for variousl reasons.  It seems to me that the folders are redundant and a hinderance if your files are tagged.

I have found some useful freewares that will convert files from one format to another, so that is helpful.  I have also found another freeware that claims to help with tagging of files, although I have not had any good results with that.  If anybody has any suggestions to me I'm all ears.

 I'd stick with WAV...........I like to keep my tunes as close to original as possible. What kind of stereo gear do you have?

I have no decent gear to speak of now.  I used to be into it big time before wife and kids.  I will be buying plenty soon.  I'm a Klipsch fanatic, and will blow piles of money on good speakers.  Any sturdy receiver will do imo (denon, yamaha, higher end pioneer), I have never been convinced on tube amps - too much maintenance and expense.

Well, I'm certainly no expert on the matter, but I'll give it a shot...

WAV VS FLAC VS MP3

Just as a basis for comparison, I ripped "Enter Sandman" by Metallica into the 3 different formats:

WAV (using default settings): 55.7 MB
FLAC (using default settings): 37.3 MB
MP3 (using VBR default settings): 8.07 MB

WAV: WAV files are pretty much useless (no offense Mugg) other than for archival purposes. Yes, you end up with an EXACT reproduction but you can't a) embed any tags into the file (album name, year, cover art, etc...), b) play it on any portable devices (or, if you could, you wouldn't end up with too many tunes on the device thanks to the cumbersome size of the files) and c) organize them into playlists unless you do it manually (this is where tags come in handy so that your audio program can do it for you based on your criteria).

FLAC: Everything you can't do with WAV, you can do with FLAC. It's more or less 'lossless', although if you rip an entire CD for archival purposes, it'll create a small file with the missing data (in the event you ever want to rip it back into CD format).

MP3: The only way to go if you have a portable device, limited storage space, lots of music and/or can't tell the difference. If you are going with MP3, however, you should always rip at VBR (variable bit rate). It's pointless to rip at 320kbps when you can get more or less the same amount of information with something ripped at 225(VBR) kbps and at a smaller size. Example: let's say you have "Loud - Quiet - Loud - Quiet" with each part representing 1 MB. An MP3 at 320kbps will rip all 4 parts equally at 320kbps and produce a 4 MB file. An MP3 at VBR, however, will rip the "Quiet" at a much lower bit rate than the "Loud" simply because there's not really anything there - I know that's not an overly technical explanation, but it's the best I can do while I'm watching the football game.

FOLDERS

I'm neither 'Pro' nor 'Con', but you can change your output settings to determine whether you want everything in individual folders or not. Besides, if you were going to make a CD for someone, I presume you'd make it off a playlist to begin with, as opposed to delving into hundreds of folders.

PROGRAMS
iTunes is the gold standard as far as jukeboxes go. For ripping, Easy CD-DA Extractor (it's not free, but if you're just ripping your collection, you've got 30 days) and for tagging TagScanner.

Thank you very much sir.  It seems you have confirmed some things that I have encountered, and I learned a lil bit as well.  I will try tagscanner for sure.

OK Hugh I have more questions for you...

I'm glad to hear you are an iTunes guy, so I will assume you know quite a bit about how files can be handled within such a program.

I'm a novice at best.  I have managed to get my two boys' ipods stuffed full of great music, but I think I really messed up how the files are stored, etc.

I like the way you talk about mp3 files, as opposed to the iTunes format (I forget what that is).  I prefer the open source model for everything.  So when I try to import music into the iTunes library, it seems to be "converting" the files as it takes several seconds to bring in each file.

Here is what I think I want.  You please tell me if I'm the right track.

1)  I want my entire library to be stored in FLAC format.  All tagged and so on, that library serving me as the gold standard of my music library.  I would also likely want to back that library up in its entirety on a routine basis.  So therefore, I would have two copies of my library in FLAC, fully tagged.

2)  I want to duplicate this library in mp3 format for portable listening devices, for obvious reasons.  This library will reside on my PC, the same PC that I have my iTunes jukebox.

3)  I want the iTunes to "refer" to my mp3 library.  I don't want iTunes to make an additional copy of my mp3 library, that seems redudant.  In other words, my mp3 library should exist so I can add or delete tunes as I wish.  I would like iTunes to know where to go to get a file to play, or to download onto an ipod.  I don't want to "import" or "convert" any mp3 files into iTunes, or into another library that iTunes wants to create for its own use.

Am I on the right track?  I assume its some setting I need to play with on the iTunes, but I have not figured it out as of yet.  If I'm all wrong about this, please sent me straight.

 

Well, I'll try to answer your questions as best as I can but, as I stated before, I'm certainly no expert on the matter. Also, to lessen any potential confusion, I'll start from the beginning and you can work from whichever point best describes your situation.

1) RIPPING YOUR CD'S
Start by downloading a quality ripper like Exact Audio Copy or Easy CD-DA Extractor. There might be better, more efficient rippers on the market, but these are the two I have the most experience with, so they'll have to do.

Exact Audio Copy is probably the best free ripper on the market, but also very barebones and extremely complex, so you're probably best to steer clear. Easy CD DA Extractor is the one I've used for the past several years because it's pretty much an all in one. You can rip your CD to all the various formats (WAV, FLAC, MP3), convert between the various formats (FLAC to MP3, for example), and it will also tag the files for you (Title, Album, Year, Track #) and give you the option of downloading the cover art from Amazon.

Programs like Windows Media Player and iTunes will do all of the above, but the big issue with them is the manner in which they rip the CD's, especially if you're going to go with MP3's using Variable Bit Rate, which you most definitely should. It's a little more technical than I really understand, but basically the algorithm WMP and iTunes use to convert stuff to VBR apparently isn't all that efficient (or at least they didn't use to be); in other words, you'll end up with lower quality files than you would otherwise.

2 ) FORMATS
Much like WAV, FLAC is primarily for archival purposes: a) due to the size of the resulting file (see above for my comparison) and b) the fact that it's not widely accepted as a format (ie. you won't be able to listen to them using either iTunes or an iPod). You can most definitely go with FLAC to back up your collection, but as far as playing them goes, MediaMonkey's the only mainstream player I know of that will support them (I'm sure there are others, just lesser well known).

Plus, not to beat a dead horse, but if you're going to back up your files using the MP3 standard (don't even bother with those garbage formats like Microsoft's WMA or Apple's AAC), go with Variable Bit Rate. I know I didn't explain it overly well before but, basically, VBR will deliver you the most efficient MP3 you can get (in terms of both file size and audio quality).

3) YOUR COLLECTION
When you rip your stuff, you can obviously designate what folder you want it to be ripped to (ex: "My Music"/"FLAC" or "My Music"/"MP3"). If you don't want iTunes to make duplicate copies when it imports your MP3's, just go to "Edit / Preferences / Advanced" and de-select "Copy Files To iTunes Media Folder". That will leave your files where they are and NOT bring in new copies into your iTunes folder where they'd be placed into the appropriate folders (artist, album, etc...) I, for one, like the fact that iTunes gives my collection at least some sort of structure, but that's just me.

Anyways, I realize this might have been a little long winded and may not have actually answered all your questions, but it's the best I could do.

Good luck!

Oh,and I forgot... If you are going to go with VBR, always go with "Preset - Standard". That's the setting of choice for those who like to, um, distribute files to others...

Thank you so much for your insight Hugh... I will try to digest and proceed when my mind is fresh

 No offense taken hugh..........I'm more about the quality of sound........couldn't care less about tagging.

I agree with you about tube gear.......but it still has quite a fan base. Tube amps do sound kind of cool but are expensive in comparison to a good AB amp. Klipsch are very good for the money........very efficient..........good for a HT/stereo combination.
 Just a tip, as you start to build a system. I've found that you can get good sound using a modest receiver (say 100 wpc) & smaller speakers (maybe not bookshelf but don't have to be the biggest towers) if you buy a quality subwoofer. A good sub will take a lot of strain off of your receiver/amplifier.
 

Point well taken.  But I have my heart set on the top of line Klipsch RF-7 II.  I want concert experience on my couch, and I will have it.  After blowing $3200 on speakers, all you really need is a mid-grade receiver, and actually any cd player will do.  Don't worry, I will do better than that...

When I was a teenager, a friend of mine had an older brother that had a true audiophile sanctuary set up in the basement.  One pair of Klipschorns on the A side, a pair of Klipsch Cornwalls on the B side.  Two mono Crown amps, and McIntosh from there on, including two turntables I don't recall the brand, but I remember the cartridges cost a bundle.  A dozen crates of vinyl for endless listening.  There was always a thick cloud of smoke in the air that make The 70's show look silly.  We experienced concerts daily.  Those were the days, at about 115db crystal clear.

 That's bizarre........... a guy we used to buy dope from back in HS (a friend of a friend) had Cornwalls too..........& a rack of gear I couldn't even comprehend back then. It was the 1st time I'd ever heard a REAL system.
 My ex & I had a pair of Klipsch Forte's (10 years ago).......excellent speakers........ a bit bright for an untreated room but we just kept the volume down to a low roar, lol.
 I spent 3 years putting together my current system.........got a great deal on a Yamaha RX-V3300.......decent Denon CD player (need to upgrade)........B&K Ref7250 amp (5x200wpc....$1000/used)......Paradigm Studio Ref. 60's for fronts, Ref 20's for rears, & a Velodyne DLS-4000 sub. I went through a few different pieces of gear before I settled on all of this. One thing I learned is that you can save quite a bit by finding stuff on Craigslist, Ebay, or Audiogon. I got my receiver & sub for half price on close out but got the amp off of Audiogon. Bought the speakers new........spendy but worth it.
 It's a fun hobby but it can be expensive. GL & have fun building your new system.

I have been watching craigs list and ebay, I have not heard of Audiogon, but I will check it out.