Is it too late for ripping ?

I think there is a place for both. 

I expect an HQ internet streaming solution would offer my mainstream choices; but my obscure Toyah albums? I felt lucky when (some) were released on CD. 

and my Hafler Trio and O.S.T. (Chris Douglas NOT a generic film score!)

Yesterday it took 2 and a half hours for me to download a hi-res Boards Of Canada release, but it only takes an hour to play so how is streaming going to bridge the dataflow gap for those who do not live in cities?

Every time I play a ripped CD it costs nothing. Leaving aside costs, apparently hi-res music providers were first against the wall after the revolution came (according to Hitchhiker's Guide I have here) so there's no future in it 

Hey Maurice,

Indeed a very valid point. The future will probably provide us with possibilities to stream lossless or even Hi-Res music. It would be an ideal world being able to enjoy high resolution anywhere from any gear, as lo,g as you are the "owner". The question is probably how far the future is away from us today, so lots of considerations and uncertainties:

• what is the cost for high resolution streaming
• how long will it take to be available
• will there be a sufficient:qualitative catalogue or just the popular music

Ripping your CD's and owning the data physically gives you so much flexibility ...... i.e. what, if you wanted to make a MP3 copy of your lossless albums to use in the car or on your iPod .... what if you want to create your own dedicated playlists etc ..

There are various ripping providers available nowadays that will rip your CD's for you at reasonable prices.

Iver

Mmmmmmm......I'd have a bet that if hi-res streaming ever took off on a large scale internet providers would be throttling back data allowances and capping usage very quickly.

There's never something for nothing.

Thanks all for your views. But it seems the thread is already drifting towards high res streaming. Please leave this aside for now. My question is about CD quality streaming, not high res (which would be a bonus). After all, ripping CDs gives us CD quality, obviously. As far high res is concerned, downloads are perfectly acceptable to me.

@Maxi Me & hafler3o,

You're right, obscure CDs won't be available for Internet streaming for a while, or maybe not at all. But I wouldn't say my collection only comprises such albums. And those, I still can rip them, but they would count as a fraction of the whole, so lifting the burden quite a bit.

@Iver,

Good point about lower-res transcoding. In fact, this is what I do. But you can also have lower-quality streaming offerings where you can download DRMed files when you have WiFi to play later.

For sure the writing is on the wall. That is, a paid service for higher resolution streaming will become a reality, once the lawyers have decided on it.

The downside (for me) on streaming services are these -

1. Mandatory internet access with adequate bandwidth

2. The cost you pay to the internet provider

3. The cost you pay to the streaming service provider

With your own ripped CD collection, you are free of these encumbrances. For now, the "free" streaming services will be my tool of discovery and CD or download equivalent the reference source...

timster

As with many others, I've thousands of CD's.

I took the plunge to rip them all to a NAS drive last year and stream via a Uniti2. This took months - some weeks I spent just about every waking hour feeding CD's into a drive and ripping via dBpoweramp. Just as well I've no SWMBO or indeed a life!

The time taken to rip CD's for even a modest collection and any corrections to metadata is substantial and should not be underestimated.

So why did I do it?

1. I wanted all my CD's readily accessible.

2. If I had a computer glitch, I still had the CD's to re-rip.

3. I wanted a Uniti so much it hurt!

4. It sounds ace and has re-introduced me to my collection.

5. I could join this forum and spend vast amounts of money on CD's recommended here!

So why not stream from the internet or download in CD or better quality?

1. Repurchase via download - I can't afford to replace my CD's. Thousands of CD's = tens of thousands of pounds.

2. Not all my CD's are available via download.

3. Even though I live in between two major cities, I barely get 0.5 meg "broadband". This would have taken longer to download than to rip.

4. CD & HQ downloads are simply overpriced in the UK.

5. Availability of downloads is very poor.

6. I've nearly 2 Tb of ripped music now - I'm sure my ISP would have capped my account pronto.

Streaming/downloading via the internet probably is the future (let's not get into the vinyl v CD debate here!) but it's not one that will be available to me in the short- to medium term.

Regards,

Vlad

It's not so much as to what someone thinks the future might be, so much as what suits the individual. 24/96 and higher over the internet? Don't think so. But if it's a real choice, cost effective and attractive, then why not? I'll stick to local storage. 

Look at all the available sources for playing LPs, tapes, CDs, files of CD resolution, less than and more than CD resolution, that now exist. What's not to like? Even more choice is a good thing. What's bad is when people tell you what you should chose.

Actually it can be a little better (on average) About 20 of my CDs contained frame errors which the dBPowerAmp software corrected (I'm assuming this is due to manufacturing errors / damage / age etc.) 1 CD was so bad dB would not rip it, it played in CD players and the UnitiLite but did not sound that great (crispy treble), I replaced it and the step up in SQ was appreciable, so it has had a benefit over CD.

Now when you stream a CD at CD quality, what exact version are you getting, as there are many 'versions' of the same 'Title' out there?

It is now three years since I settled on ripping my CDs [now saved in boxes as proof of ownership of the right to use them], and it took six weeks of work for a couple of hours each evening.

I ripped into iTunes, at ALAC standard, though eventually settled on AIFF as being better - to my ears.

I converted all the ALAC to AIFF last year, and that was almost as much work as I did not have the HD space to batch convert, but had to do a limited number of files at a time and then delete the original ALAC files.

Now the job is done and adequate back-ups made, then I am glad to say that I am completely satisfied with the result after three years of not using the physical CDs directly anymore.

I also have no interest in Hi-res streaming or computer audio, as almost none of my collection of recordings has emerged as Hi-res, and those that have are not improved by the process, as the basic recordings do not take any advantage from the higher resolution.

For myself, I would never put myself in the position of having to rely on the internet for real time streaming of music that was central to my listening for ever so many reasons. Once the core of the music in a collection is contained in a computer [or NAS or whatever] then the job is done, and if adequately backed up [two external hard drives, which can be disconnected is the minimum in my opinion] then if anything goes wrong with the main hard drive system, it is merely a repair job to get back to where you were before. Much less disastrous in my view than replacing a CD player mechanism for example.

There is no doubt that ripping CDs is a real labour, but once done you will never look back on using the physical carrier again!

ATB from George

My problem is that my crystal ball is too fuzzy.  And I want music replay NOW, not "in the future."  So I ripped my few hundred cd's, spent some more time fixing up the metadata, and I am now the proud owner of a lossless music library on hard drive(s).

Will this library be relevant 5 years from now?  I have no idea!  But in the meantime I can listen to all my music in two different rooms (at the same time), and in my cars (via iPods) and wherever I am in the world (via iTunes music match which give me lossy versions of almost everything).  And with just some fiddling I could give myself internet access to my home library from outside the home.

If in a few years I can do all of this without owning the music and just paying a monthly fee -- maybe that'll be my future.  But since that crystal ball is still fuzzy, I've got what I've got for now.

Exactly. I'm enjoying my CD's second time around..............

My concern is that the streaming devices/protocols of the future will be distinctly low res - mass market devices are likely to be lowest common denominator mp3 and Apple formats.

Vlad

Which is fine if that's what the mass market wants. So long as the rest of us are catered for. I expect my ingestion of new music will continue to tail off. I don't hear much truly interesting or more to the point original new music as I get older. I'm always happy to be pleasantly surprised, but my present collection could easily keep me busy for the rest of my life. And as things stand it's in my preferred format. How many times have I thought that down the years?!

With respect, in addition to what has been said above, you are all forgetting the amount of time and love which you have spent acquiring your CD collections. I have 1800 now ripped to my Unitiserve, playable in an instant. Try using e.g. Spotify to play a particular CD from your collection and watch your precious time disappear in locating exactly the recording you want. Bad enough with Rock or Pop, a nightmare on Classical, and especially on Opera. (And Spotify is 320k max. Is there really a comprehensive service with 'CD quality' available to stream?).

Plenty of life in ripping yet!!!

David, you have summed it up perfectly. The value of having my entire music collection on a single device (the UnitiServe of course) is priceless. Think you know your collection? Set the Serve to random play and prepare for the goosebumps - and memories - as you reencounter songs that moved you years ago... It's not a computer, it's a time machine.

Jan