Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive? (Read 17084 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

After downloading and configuring REACT, as well as reading the forums and Wikis for a day, I now have a question.

I am intent on digitalizing my CD collection. For the one part, I will rip them as MP3 files (LAME) for use with my iPod. For the other part, I want to have a lossless compression as well. This is for archival purposes, as well as for a digital music player I would like to buy some time in the future. As I am thinking of a multi-room system, I might be going for something from Linn.

The question is - do I want an image (with CUE sheet?) or single tracks in FLAC format for this purpose?

Regards,
Polarsken

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #1 –
There have been a lot of previous topics on this subject, several of which are quite recent. Have you tried searching, using either the built-in Google search or the forum search (put a + before +each +keyword to make sure they're all included)? That should bring up a few discussions about this very question.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #2 –
As long as your rips are done "correctly' it shouldn't matter.

Whether you want cue/image or individual tracks with corresponding cue sheet is really just personal preference.

I usually do single-file/cue but it may be more convenient for you to do them as individual tracks. It will save you some time if and when you ever want to re-encode your lossless collection to a different lossy format.
The Loudness War is over. Now it's a hopeless occupation.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #3 –
Thanks for your answers! Yes, I tried searching earlier on, but didn't find much. The trick with the "+" before each keyword did the trick. This thread helps and answers my questions regarding the correct settings in EAC.

My main worries are:

  • getting it to work on a hardware digital audio player (such as Linn) and
  • audible gaps e.g. on live CDs.

As long as an image (single file) is okay for 1, then 2 shouldn't be a problem anyway (and if I do use separate tracks, with the correct settings I shouldn't have problems with gaps, from the way I understand it). So in the end, Engelsstaub's argument of easily converting to another lossy format goes for the single-file image, I would say. Now I'm not sure I'm understanding right: are individual tracks or a single image file better for re-encoding to another lossy format?

Polarsken

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #4 –
I've always used the tracks method, never one file.  I think it would save time if you only wanted a couple of songs, and not the whole album encoded....separate files make it easier to cherry pick which ones you want.
foobar2000, FLAC, and qAAC -V90
It just works people!

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #5 –
Quote
I think it would save time if you only wanted a couple of songs, and not the whole album encoded

OP should note that REACT is meant for ripping whole albums.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #6 –
Does it take much more time to maintain one archive and then transcode to mp3 rather than copy to mp3s? In old days I'd recommend the first option, but mp3 players are getting biggg.

As for the original question:
- I have had too many CDs which require re-ripping of individual tracks.
- On CDs with data, there is not -- at least to my knowledge, and I have both searched and asked here -- an image format which produces a faithful copy of the silver disc anyway.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #9 –
It was for you.  They are the typical requirements for a 1:1 copy, though it is possible that the lossless data by itself is sufficient or that all three are still not sufficient.

EDIT: Noting the title of this topic, it is incorrect to assume that image means a single file.  There is no rule that says an image can't be comprised of multiple tracks.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #10 –
Although the topic title is not Image "XOR" Tracks, I do beg to differ. (Which CDDA or DVD ripping software do refer to as "image" something which stores the actual data in two or more files?)

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #11 –
Your petty nitpicking about XOR aside (it is clear from the opening post that the OP is in fact posting the question as an exclusive or)...

Where in that article are audio CDs addressed?  That aside, assuming that you are actually right, though I would never use wikipedia as definitive fact for anything, you are conceding that EAC is not capable of creating images.

Which CDDA ripping software refers to an image as something which stores the all the necessary data in only one file?

Which CDDA ripping software is capable of storing all the necessary data in only one file?

Which program is capable of storing all the necessary data for an enhanced audio CD in only one file?

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #12 –
Quote from: greynol on
Your petty nitpicking about XOR aside (it is clear from the opening post that the OP is in fact posting the question as an exclusive or)...


Well then ... I read your edit to be an attempt of precisely this nitpicking you accuse me of. I might have misinterpreted you.



Quote from: greynol on
though I would never use wikipedia as definitive fact for anything


Neither do I, but hey, please back your statements with anything more than your own words.



Quote from: greynol on
Where in that article are audio CDs addressed?


In the very first sentence, assuming we can agree that an audio CD is either "a data storage medium or device" or "an optical disc" or both.


Quote from: greynol on
you are conceding that EAC is not capable of creating images.


Que?


Quote from: greynol on
Which program is capable of storing all the necessary data for an enhanced audio CD in only one file?


Well, that is precisely what I addressed in the first place. To my knowledge there is no such image format, let alone a piece of software which supports it. Right?

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #13 –
If by image you mean everything stuffed into a single file and not something like zip or a flac with an embedded cue sheet, then I believe you are correct.

From the perspective that people often equate image with perfection and anything that is not an image is suspect of being less than perfect, strict usage of the term gets us into trouble.  Classic examples include, "I used an image program to copy my CD, it must therefore be free from errors," "unless you rip to a single file, you will not get a perfect backup," and "unless you rip to a single file, you will get gaps in the audio."

Regarding the wikipedia article, I suggest you re-familiarize yourself with ISO 9660, UDF and how redbook differs from them.  It is clear that this article was intended for data and not for audio.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #14 –
Quote from: greynol on
Regarding the wikipedia article, I suggest you re-familiarize yourself with ISO 9660, UDF and how redbook differs from them.  It is clear that this article was intended for data and not for audio.


*sigh*

Well, at least you need not ask me to re-famliarize myself with your retorics.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #15 –
I wouldn't for your spelling either.

Something I wanted to clarify...
Quote from: Porcus on
Quote from: greynol on
Which program is capable of storing all the necessary data for an enhanced audio CD in only one file?
Well, that is precisely what I addressed in the first place. To my knowledge there is no such image format, let alone a piece of software which supports it.

Not exactly.  I was referring to both enhanced as well as audio-only CDs.  For some reason the previous question I asked was left unanswered.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #16 –
*sigh* again.

Look, Greynol: I do appreciate the voluntary work you do for this community, but not your behaviour when someone makes the atrocity of  disagreeing with your personal terminology. What's the use of a Knowledgebase when we have moderators like this? (And what's the use of taking time to dig up links, when you know you are up against someone who is armed with a delete button?)

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #17 –
Perhaps we simply agree to disagree.

I'm really trying to figure whether you think it's OK to call a single-file lossless file + CUE an image; I do.  I also think it's OK to call a set of tracks + CUE an image.  While you may not, I see utility in this.  If we were to drop the word image altogether for audio CDs and felt that would help curb the nonsense about errors, gaps and other missing data then I'd be all for it as well.  Unfortunately I don't believe it will happen.

BTW, I did in fact miss that your concern over images was about enhanced CDs, so my response to you was off-base, though I still stand firmly behind my position that images of audio CDs need not be limited by the number of files required to comprise them.  It will take more than a wikipedia article about data CDs to change my mind.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #18 –
Quote from: Polarsken on
Now I'm not sure I'm understanding right: are individual tracks or a single image file better for re-encoding to another lossy format?

If you use foobar2000 then you can convert a single-file lossless image + CUE to individual lossy tracks just as easily as you can with individual lossless tracks; even if you are only interested in converting a select few.  Other converters might not be as flexible.

Whether or not you will have gapless support and which method of ripping will achieve it will depend on the hardware you choose.  A single-file image will certainly play back without gaps but your player will need to know how to use a CUE sheet if you ever wish to skip tracks.  It seems the most often recommended player, the Squeezebox, can handle either.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #19 –
Greynol:

If you are on the search for truth, you might consider a different approach than discarding as "incorrect" the notion used in the Knowledgebase specifically for the purpose of ripping an entire audio CD and as ignorant whoever uses that terminology. (Take this from someone who is arrogant. Even to the degree that he admits counting the hate mail and death threats he has collected from it.)

And yes I know that anyone regardless of privileges is entitled to possess opinions and assholes, but few forums would benefit from giving the impression that FAQreading will get you bashed by a moderator (who then recourses to spellflaming).

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #20 –
Quote from: greynol on
whether you think it's OK to call a single-file lossless file + CUE an image; I do.

I agree.

Quote from: greynol on
I also think it's OK to call a set of tracks + CUE an image.

I very well understand what you mean, in some sense this is actually correct, but I don't agree with this. Why? EAC. It has coined (AFAIK) the "image vs. tracks". Terminology about this is troublesome. We have "images" that mean many different things when it comes to CD's (not only CDDA). Maybe people just need to learn what CDDA images, CD images, etc. different images mean. Otherwise, would we have to use e.g "audio tracks as an image" (or similar "long" explanation) terms when talking about audio CD's?

Quote from: greynol on
If we were to drop the word image altogether for audio CDs and felt that would help curb the nonsense about errors, gaps and other missing data then I'd be all for it as well.  Unfortunately I don't believe it will happen.

I agree.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #21 –
When creating a cue sheet, EAC explicitly states a Single WAV File, but you're right, when ripping to a single file, it does call it an image (it refers to it as a range as well).

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #22 –
Quote from: Engelsstaub on
As long as your rips are done "correctly' it shouldn't matter...


FLAC compression is slightly more efficient when working on a continuous audio file versus multiple smaller segments of the same audio stream. It does matter, you're saving a few megabytes storage here and there by archival to one flac file per album.

Playback is not so easy. Rockbox has partial cuesheet support for portable playback. QMMP supports cuesheets for desktop playback. I've read that some programs on other platforms may support cuesheets.

Support for the CUESHEET metadata block in FLAC format is even less widely recognized.

Splitting one FLAC file per album out to multiple files is a simple operation, if you want to encode to a lossy format or change your mind later.

Image or Tracks for FLAC Archive?

Reply #24 –
Quote from: jnc on
FLAC compression is slightly more efficient when working on a continuous audio file versus multiple smaller segments of the same audio stream. It does matter, you're saving a few megabytes storage here and there by archival to one flac file per album.

Where did you get this? I was skeptical and ran 1 test (just encoding with -5), here's the resulting FLAC file sizes (on NTFS disk):

Tracks: 261 MB (273 765 244 bytes) ... size on disk 261 MB (273 788 928 bytes)
Image: 261 MB (273 764 403 bytes) ... size on disk 261 MB (273 768 448 bytes)

Differences: 841 bytes & size on disk 20480 bytes.

I say it's peanuts. Even with e.g. 1000 CD's, it's going to be only ~20 MB's, while the FLAC's would take ~261 000 MB's. (figures heavily depend on the style of the music in the 1 disc I tested)

Maybe you didn't count embedded cover images as the difference?  It's definitely not FLAC compression.