Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

**Spoon** · January 11, 2011, 08:47 AM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

There is no universal lossless format that plays in WMP and iTunes with cover art, as these two companies are trying to force their respective lossless formats and refuse to support FLAC.

I would use FLAC, Wavs ripped with dBpoweramp do contain cover art and tags.

**Mirko88** · January 11, 2011, 10:08 AM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Thank you for the quick response.
I have heard and read various arguments against using FLAC. It appears that in the conversion when played back differences can be heard in sound.

What is the reason you recommend FLAC if it is not supported by Windows or Apple? Is it merely the size of the files?

Good to read that Wav ripped with dBpoweramp can contain tags + cover art. Do these tags only work in dBpoweramp or will they also show when I play the ripped wav's in other players such as iTunes? I always thought that Wav's can't contain tags, but I do know in some databases you can have them as some kind of index in a librabry (I have the Harman Kardon DMC1000 media player which works like that). As soon as you copy the files and play them in another player, the metadata and cover art remains in the media player.
Does the tag + cover art actually become part of the wav and will it be visible for any other player or converter? I want to be as universal as possible of course.

**Spoon** · January 11, 2011, 11:02 AM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Very little will read the id tags from wave.

Lossless is lossless, it can be transferred between Apple Lossless and WMA Lossless. FLAC is a good storage format as it internally contains MD5s which self detect if the file is damaged, Apple Lossless and WMA lossless do nto.

**garym** · January 11, 2011, 10:28 PM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Originally posted by Mirko88

It appears that in the conversion when played back differences can be heard in sound.

There are many knowledgeable folks on this topic that can tell you that this assertion is nonsense. You should google around a bit and particularly search the forums at hydrogenaudio.org for discussions of this.

**Mirko88** · January 12, 2011, 07:38 AM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

It is hard to tell nonsense from facts on the internet. But I agree, there is a lot of information to be found on the toppic. FLAC has the same bits and bytes and WAV or AIFF for that matter, so quality should be the same.
I did a test though on a Sonos system and really can hear the difference. I am certainly not an expert or a tachnical person, but my assumption is that it has got to do with the uncompressing process. So not talking about quality of the data, but the sound itself.
Well, in the end it is all a matter of testing I think.

After careful consideration I have decided to rip to AIFF and MP3 320kbps.
I don't like Windows Media Player at all as the library sucks. iTunes is so much user friendly. As well, Apple/iTunes will also be around for many more years to come, so my music collection in AIFF should be future proof.
Advantage of AIFF seems to be that the tags added in dBpoweramp display perfectly in iTunes and other players I have tested. The tags with WAV don't carry over when played in another player. AIFF can always be converted to WAV or FLAC when needed. So it seems to be the most flexible uncompressed lossless format for my needs. And who cares about disc space....what does a 1TB hard drive cost anyway?

The multi-ecode to MP3 as well allows me to easily have the collection available for iPod/Pad etc. Just show it as a second library in iTunes and all is under 1 button!

Thanks for your comments and support so far!

**garym** · January 12, 2011, 05:48 PM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Originally posted by Mirko88

It is hard to tell nonsense from facts on the internet. But I agree, there is a lot of information to be found on the toppic. FLAC has the same bits and bytes and WAV or AIFF for that matter, so quality should be the same.
I did a test though on a Sonos system and really can hear the difference. I am certainly not an expert or a tachnical person, but my assumption is that it has got to do with the uncompressing process. So not talking about quality of the data, but the sound itself.
Well, in the end it is all a matter of testing I think.

After careful consideration I have decided to rip to AIFF and MP3 320kbps.
I don't like Windows Media Player at all as the library sucks. iTunes is so much user friendly. As well, Apple/iTunes will also be around for many more years to come, so my music collection in AIFF should be future proof.
Advantage of AIFF seems to be that the tags added in dBpoweramp display perfectly in iTunes and other players I have tested. The tags with WAV don't carry over when played in another player. AIFF can always be converted to WAV or FLAC when needed. So it seems to be the most flexible uncompressed lossless format for my needs. And who cares about disc space....what does a 1TB hard drive cost anyway?

The multi-ecode to MP3 as well allows me to easily have the collection available for iPod/Pad etc. Just show it as a second library in iTunes and all is under 1 button!

Thanks for your comments and support so far!

Can you tag and have artwork with AIFF?

And I'm not trying to be argumentative, just helpful in terms of another opinion, but a couple of things about this FLAC vs WAV issue. Again, I think many people in addition to me would tell you that if you can EASILY hear the difference between FLAC and WAV files on playback then something is either very wrong with your FLAC rips or your player. But I suspect it may be simpler than that. Understand that even very tiny differences in the sound level in two tracks can make the slightly louder track sound "better". This has been tested many times in double blind tests. And the "louder" doesn't have to be much louder (maybe not even that noticeable). With FLAC are you adding replaygain tags when ripping? If so, SONOS may be using those (I use Squeezebox products and they use the replaygain tags, which is a useful thing by the way). Use of the tags could lower the volume on the FLAC as compared with the WAV files.

I would also suggest that you do an ABX (blind) test of a FLAC and WAV rip of the same song. Download foobar2000 and one of the components is an ABX tester. Easy enough to use for this purpose.

And another thought. I know lots of people who are extremely serious about secure ripping, managing their music collections in excess of 10,000 albums, etc. I can say that 99% of these folks use FLAC for their lossless format and then use either mp3 or AAC for a lossy mirror for use on ipods, etc. Some use ALAC (apple lossless). A handful use WAV but the tagging is a problem. But none of these folks I know use AIFF for their lossless storage medium. I don't know about you, but this is informative to me.

p.s. Over at the squeezebox forums there are a few folks (in a minority) that really believe the decoding of the FLAC file at the player level reduces the sound quality. These folks instead prefer to have the FLAC decoded by the Server before it is streamed to the actual player, thus reducing the load on the player. This is an option with squeezeboxes. But again, the majority don't hear any difference at all in the two approaches and in fact some technical analysis with audiodiffmaker indicates not difference.

here's but one long thread you might read through. Keep in mind that some of the posters don't have a clue what they are talking about, but some are quite knowledgeable about the subject.

Just a moment...

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71321&highlight=wav+versus+flac

Again, I don't use SONOS, so it may very well be that SONOS players are not good at decoding FLAC files at the player level, so this could be your issue. I'd guess that if this was true there would be a lot of discussion on this at the SONOS forums.

But bottom line: Enjoy the music!

**Mirko88** · January 13, 2011, 10:13 AM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Garym,

Thank you for your clear reply. I appreciate feedback like this and offers me a new perspective.
I'm not a technical guy, but I believe you can tag AIFF. CD's ripped in dBpoweramp play in iTunes and show all the tagged info + cover art. Perhaps I need to do a further test.

I have given things a lot of thought in the past week, as you can only do it right once with a large CD collection (or you will have to repeat the cumbersome work). What made my decision easier in the end is:
- storage space is not an issue with the prices for HDD's
- I use iTunes a lot and AIFF's work really well in iTunes. I also think it is a standard that will be around for a long time with all the iPods out in the market
- At any time I can convert AIFF to WAV or FLAC when needed and won't loose my work or quality of the ripped audio. This to me was an important argument as it becomes less important in that case which format to use.

Things I will test in more detail this week:
- Does metadata and cover art display well in other players (besides WMP) with AIFF?
- What happens with the metadata and cover art when I convert to FLAC?

**Spoon** · January 13, 2011, 10:43 AM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

> but I believe you can tag AIFF. CD's ripped in dBpoweramp play in iTunes and show all the tagged info + cover art.

You can. Converting between lossless formats preserves all tag data and cover art.

**garym** · January 13, 2011, 12:59 PM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Originally posted by Mirko88

Garym,

Thank you for your clear reply. I appreciate feedback like this and offers me a new perspective.
I'm not a technical guy, but I believe you can tag AIFF. CD's ripped in dBpoweramp play in iTunes and show all the tagged info + cover art. Perhaps I need to do a further test.

I have given things a lot of thought in the past week, as you can only do it right once with a large CD collection (or you will have to repeat the cumbersome work). What made my decision easier in the end is:
- storage space is not an issue with the prices for HDD's
- I use iTunes a lot and AIFF's work really well in iTunes. I also think it is a standard that will be around for a long time with all the iPods out in the market
- At any time I can convert AIFF to WAV or FLAC when needed and won't loose my work or quality of the ripped audio. This to me was an important argument as it becomes less important in that case which format to use.

Things I will test in more detail this week:
- Does metadata and cover art display well in other players (besides WMP) with AIFF?
- What happens with the metadata and cover art when I convert to FLAC?

That's logical. And given that AIFF can hold tag data and album art (good to know) and that you can losslessly convert to FLAC or anything else, then you're good to go no matter what you might decide to do differently in the future.

**lobisimo** · January 13, 2011, 01:00 PM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Hey Spoon and the others,

first a big hello and happy 2011, this is my first posting in this forum

I don't want to enter a „which format sounds better?“ discussion, I just want to be on the safe side having „perfectly“ ripped all my hundreds CDs in both FLAC and WAVE in case software/Musicplayer/HDDs/etc. will change in 5 or 15 years. After ripping, both FLAC and WAVE files will be stored/backed up in ordinary 100€ external 1TB USB drives and for listening from my Ripnas I will choose the format I am going to enjoy more.

My equipments are Akurate DS Dynamik & Squeezebox Classic, new RIPnas Z 1000 with dBpoweramp Ripnas 1.7 purchased few months ago[/B], Supernait & Rotel amps.

Once again, the idea is to rip FLAC and WAVE that will be almost 100% compatible with/running in Kinsky, Ipod/Ipad or other common WLAN based RC, Squeezserver and USB/CD use in my car / Nokia Music Express mobile.

I don't worry about FLAC, with FLAC everything works fine using the default options in my dbpoweramp (tagging, compression etc).

Now here is my question - and believe me I searched really a lot throughout the forums, but I still have no clue:

How can i be sure that my WAVE files have the most perfect/compatible tagging for Ipod, Nokia phone, Kinsky, Ipod as RC, etc? Of course I was reading a lot about checking the Advanced Codec Options of the dBpoweramp Configuration and setting the Wave ID Tagging to LIST tags, change track to 'itrk', Padding etc.
But it really took me days to consider that I can´t find these bl...y advanced codec options because the dbpoweramp version on my Ripnas 1.7 does not have them, could that be true??? So in this case, what am I supposed to do? I am not sure if the WAVE files generated by my ripnas have already the "best" taggings (at least they look fine in Kinsky and Squeezebox webpanel)! Or if I am already ripping with Padding or not? I only can see the results, but not the advanced codec options!!!!

I really appreciate any answer or help for this kind of chicken and egg issue.

Thanks,

Peter

Here are for example all infos showing up in the Squeezebox panel for 1 wave track:

Track Number: 11
File Format: WAV
Duration: 3:21
Volume Adjustment: -1.62 dB
Album Volume Adjustment: -0.31 dB
Bitrate: 1411kbps CBR (Converted to 705kbps FLAC)
Sample Rate: 44.1 kHz
Sample Size: 16 Bits
File Length: 35,611,990
Location: \\ripnas\Music\Gschwinds CDs\WAVE\Djalma Correa\Xingú; Guitar & Percussion\Sebastião Tapajós - 11 - Luz Negra.wav
Date Modified: Tuesday, January 4, 2011, 6:29 PM
Tag Version: ID3v2.3.0

ACCURATERIPDISCID: 011-001214fb-0098b4e2-9209a30b-11
ACCURATERIPRESULT: AccurateRip: Accurate (confidence 2) [CB0B9CDE]
APIC: [ image/jpeg, 3, , (29410 Bytes) ]
IART: Sebastião Tapajós Pedro Sorongo Djalma Correa
ICRD: 1984
IGNR: Latin
INAM: Luz Negra
IPRD: Xingú: Guitar & Percussion
ITRK: 11/11
REPLAYGAIN_ALBUM_GAIN: -0.31 dB
REPLAYGAIN_ALBUM_PEAK: 0.977234
REPLAYGAIN_TRACK_GAIN: -1.62 dB
REPLAYGAIN_TRACK_PEAK: 0.977203
TALB: Xingú: Guitar & Percussion
TCOM: Nelson Cavaquinho
TCON: Latin
TDRC: 1984
TIT1: Western European Traditions/Samba/Choro/Brazilian Traditions
TIT2: Luz Negra
TPE1: Sebastião Tapajós/Pedro Sorongo/Djalma Correa
TPE2: Djalma Correa
TPOS: 1/1
TRCK: 11/11
UPC: 4007198761344

**Spoon** · January 13, 2011, 02:33 PM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

There is no need to change the wave tagging options, they are there because to ensure compatibility with Sony Soundforge (professional editing software).

**Mirko88** · January 13, 2011, 02:52 PM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

How will Wave tags be available in players?
I did a test rip in Wave and played in Window Media Player for example, but I did not see the metadata or cover....

**Spoon** · January 13, 2011, 03:01 PM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Only very specific ones will pick up the tags.

**lobisimo** · January 13, 2011, 10:17 PM

Re: Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Thanks Spoon for the quick response,

so my wave tagging is perfect for most players and kind of "future-proof"? And I am able to edit tags without destroying sth in the original wave file?

I just don't want to rip everything in wave again in three years because I will have realized that some important tagging is missing

Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Best uncompressed lossless format to rip CD and have tags + cover art

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment