|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
98.245.108.98
I'm a Linux user that just set up OpenMediaVault on an old PC to use as a windows server for digital audio. I've started ripping my CD's to the OpenMediaVault share from my main Ubuntu workstation, but I think a dedicated CD ripper box would be a better idea. My preference is the ripper could boot Linux or Windows 7. I will not spend a lot of money on the PC hardware. A quick google search turned up The VortexBox distro, but I welcome recommendations from the crowd here.
Edits: 07/11/14Follow Ups:
There's no easy way in my experience to do *automatic* ripping & tagging, simply because the databases that are used to do the tagging, naming,... are often incomplete, inaccurate, or entries do not exist. Even when I buy files do I find myself having to retag things simply because there is no standard between labels. Take the example of the artist's name. Do you put the last name first, or the first one? Since this decision conditions where files are saved and how they are tagged, I prefer the DIY approach. It does not take more time to get it right the first time! And of course, there's tagging of classical music files, a whole subject in itself.
In case that's of any help: my music server runs on Linux where I use rubyripper and puddletag. There's also a Windows partition where I run EAC and mp3tag. I prefer doing the ripping under Windows, mostly because of mp3tag, but I find myself using either OS depending on what is doing at the time. All software are free.
Posted by Artoa (A) on July 12, 2014 at 18:08:02
> There's no easy way in my experience to do *automatic* ripping &
> tagging, simply because the databases that are used to do the tagging,
> naming,... are often incomplete, inaccurate, or entries do not exist. Even
> when I buy files do I find myself having to retag things simply because
> there is no standard between labels. Take the example of the artist's
> name. Do you put the last name first, or the first one? Since this
> decision conditions where files are saved and how they are tagged,
> I prefer the DIY approach. It does not take more time to get it right
> the first time! And of course, there's tagging of classical music files,
> a whole subject in itself.
I want to build an inexpensive, dedicated CD ripping box, not an automated
ripper. I'm just started to build a digital music archive and network
playback system. I would like the software to have reasonable defaults
and appreciate what you are saying about getting the file naming and
tagging as desired.
> In case that's of any help: my music server runs on Linux where I use
> rubyripper and puddletag. There's also a Windows partition where I run
> EAC and mp3tag. I prefer doing the ripping under Windows, mostly because
> of mp3tag, but I find myself using either OS depending on what is doing
> at the time. All software are free.
Thanks, I'll make note of your preferences.
Well you've already found it the Vortexbox is the one.
I especially like how it amkes ripping CDs easy. Stick it in, it gets track details rip and files the flac files correctly then ejects the cd. Next time you see the drive out change disc and it goes again. Makes ripping your cds a simple mindless task whilst you do other things rather than some mega chore.
I found this tutorial from a VortexBox user.
You can use any box to rip the CDs but the problem is you are not in control.
You have to inspect the meta data afterwards.
Makes me wonder what the benefits of this approach are.
I would recommend to rip using dBpoweramp
-Excellent meta data (you can choose from 4 sources)
-Accurate rip support so you can verify if the rip is bit perfect
The Well Tempered Computer
> Posted by Roseval (A) on July 11, 2014 at 10:03:54
> In Reply to: RE: Looking for inexpensive dedicated CD ripper box. posted by cootcraig on July 11, 2014 at 09:10:20:
>
> You can use any box to rip the CDs but the problem is you are not in control.
> You have to inspect the meta data afterwards.
> Makes me wonder what the benefits of this approach are.
My personal (and work) workstation is a clunky notebook computer that
boots Ubuntu linux. I'm finding that ripping CDs on this is
interfering with other uses.
My hope is that an inexpensive used pc running Linux or Windows would
be cost effective and not tie up the main notebook.
>
> I would recommend to rip using dBpoweramp
> -Excellent meta data (you can choose from 4 sources)
> -Accurate rip support so you can verify if the rip is bit perfect
That's the second recommendation I've seen for dBpoweramp. Thanks for
the suggestion.
And here is the third recommendation for dBpoweramp. :-) I also find the music converter and tag editing features useful.
If you plan on ripping a lot of CDs, be advised that there is a good chance that you will wear out your optical drive. Keep this in mind. For a full size PC this is no problem as replacements are cheap and easy to swap in. I would never, ever, rip more than one or two CDs using a built-in lap top drive.
Occasionally you may come across a CD that can't be successfully ripped on a given optical drive. It may be worth while trying another drive in that case. I have a few computers lying around and all of them have dBpower amp on them.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I think there are Windows and Linux versions of dBpoweramp. My default OS is Linux, but is there a reason to pick between Windows/Linux?
My hope is that an inexpensive used pc running Linux or Windows would
be cost effective and not tie up the main notebook.
Sure, you don't need much horse power to rip.
The Well Tempered Computer
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: