Home of the Squeezebox™ & Transporter® network music players.
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Linux Naming

  1. #1
    Jim Willsher
    Guest

    Linux Naming

    Many thanks all, for your replies to this list and privately. I will
    probably stick to the filenames with spaces, and remove "odd" characters
    (e.g. slashes) to make life simpler. I'll make the changes on the Windows PC
    (I've written a free file rename utility - see www.bulkrenameutility.co.uk)
    which will do the trick, but of course it's Windows based!

    I'm interested that many of you store the files in folders by artist.
    Hmmm.....I hadn't considered that, but I'm coming round to that way of
    thinking. It would certainly keep things neater.

    I'm a newbie at Linux, and I've blundered through so far, but it does seem
    the ideal host for all my files. So far I've ripped 212 albums (all from my
    own CDs I'll add!) at 256Kb/sec Dual Stero, High Quality, using AudioGrabber
    and the LAME encoder. I hope nobody's going to tell me I should have done it
    differently? They play well through my slim on my Arcam kit, so I'm happy
    with it!

    What standards do you guys rip to?

    Thanks again!



    Jim

  2. #2
    Pat Farrell
    Guest

    Linux Naming

    At 04:36 PM 4/26/2004, Jim Willsher wrote:
    >What standards do you guys rip to?


    The great things about standards is that there are so many to chose from.

    >the ideal host for all my files. So far I've ripped 212 albums (all from my
    >own CDs I'll add!) at 256Kb/sec Dual Stero, High Quality, using AudioGrabber
    >and the LAME encoder. I hope nobody's going to tell me I should have done it
    >differently?


    It really depends on what you want to do.

    I recently re-extracted and compressed my whole collection with flac.
    It is lossless, so there is no difference in the files. But they are bigger
    than Ogg, WMA, MP3, etc. lossy compression.

    It is really an engineering tradeoff, size versus quality between flac and
    the lossy formats, and then it becomes more of a theological argument
    between Ogg, WMA, Mp3, aac, etc.

    The quality drove me to flac. Or not having to ever worry about it.
    Plus, if I want some other format, I can convert from the flac files
    without touching the hundreds of CDs ever again.

    One of the major beauties of the SlimServer and SqueezeBox approach
    is that it supports nearly everything, so the user can make the engineering
    decisions for themselves. Choice is good.

    Remember the rule of the studio: if it sounds good, it is good.

    Pat

  3. #3
    Jason Holtzapple
    Guest

    Linux Naming

    Jim Willsher wrote:
    > I'm interested that many of you store the files in folders by artist.
    > Hmmm.....I hadn't considered that, but I'm coming round to that way of
    > thinking. It would certainly keep things neater.


    It's not just tidyness, although that can be a good side effect.

    Depending on the file system used, there can be a performance hit when
    using directories with 1000s of files.

    > I'm a newbie at Linux, and I've blundered through so far, but it does seem
    > the ideal host for all my files. So far I've ripped 212 albums (all from my
    > own CDs I'll add!) at 256Kb/sec Dual Stero, High Quality, using AudioGrabber
    > and the LAME encoder. I hope nobody's going to tell me I should have done it
    > differently? They play well through my slim on my Arcam kit, so I'm happy
    > with it!


    I use a high quality VBR preset (lame 3.90.3 --alt-preset standard) for mp3.
    This is highly subjective though. If it sounds good to you, use it. Try a
    double-blind ABX test on your best hifi system if you can get a friend to help
    you.

    Increasingly though I am using FLAC for lossless encoding.

    --Jason

  4. #4
    Roy M. Silvernail
    Guest

    Linux Naming

    On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 16:36, Jim Willsher wrote:

    > What standards do you guys rip to?


    Most of my discs are ripped to 256kb CBR. Lately, I've started using
    --preset extreme with lame. The file sizes come out a bit smaller, but
    more importantly I like the psychoacoustic model a bit better. 256kb
    CBR is no slouch, mind you. The difference isn't quite enough for me to
    re-rip everything.
    --
    Roy M. Silvernail is roy (AT) rant-central (DOT) com, and you're not
    Never Forget: It's Only 1's and 0's!
    SpamAssassin->procmail->/dev/null->bliss
    http://www.rant-central.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •