Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ronsou]

Hi -
  I am planning on ripping my entire CD collection (about 300) to harddisk at a high bit rate, and using my computer as a digital jukebox to my home stereo.   There are a lot of choices to be made, and I could use some advice.  

1. File format:   Based on research I have done, I know I will use either 160kbps or 192 kbps bitrate.   But at those bitrates, I have seem a lot of differing opinions as to best format - WMA, MP3 or OGG.    Any thoughts, and why ?   I know this could be a hornets nest of opinions, but I'm open to anything.   I will only be ripping my own CD collection, and not sharing them.   My concern is chiefly with audio quality, with a secondary concern of size.    But I have 90GB free for the collection, which I think will be plenty for any of those formats at even 192kbps.   Right now I am leaning to WMA at 160kbps based on some stuff I've read.

2.  My computer has SPDIF output (Its one I assembled specifically for this - a Shuttle SS51G with integrated ALC650 AC97 v2.2 codec.   I am open to adding digital USB out if needed, but since this has integrated digital, I don't think I need to.)   I assume that SPDIF is the best way to connect it to home stereo.  It also supports Dolby 5.1, but I think then I need five inputs to a surround system, and it still probably won't be as good.  At least thats what I'm assuming.   I don't have a receiver with SPDIF input, but I will buy one if this is true.   I'd like to know before I go buy one.

3.  I will use MediaJukeBox as my player.   Is it also as good as anything else out there for ripping ?   From a user perspective, I like it.   I just want to know if the quality of the encoded music is equal/better than anything else I might go with.   Also, should I "normalize" when ripping, or not ?

If anyone else is doing a project like this and would like to share notes in direct email, you can reach me at ronsou@attbi.com.   But any thoughts posted here would also be greatly appreciated.   I know its a big topic.   Thank you.

[xen-uno]

Sounds like you'll have a coooool setup.

1. Ogg (preferred) or MP3 for lossy compression. Ogg is VBR by default. For MP3 use the MP3 Encoder VBR. When using MJ to encode if you set quality to Normal/High (for either format), you will hit your target bitrate (high side of 192 kb/s) that you desire.

MPEGplus (MPC) is a great format too. I just have no experience with it.

2. SPDIF would be the way to go, primarily because the computer doesn't need to be right by the stereo. SPDIF can handle long runs of cable. Normal RCA coax (from line out (analog) on sound card) attenuates signal noticeably on long runs.

>It also supports Dolby 5.1, but I think then I need five inputs to a surround system, and it still probably won't be as good

No....you don't need 5 inputs...The Dolby Digital formatting is part of the digital signal. I may be wrong here...but I don't think MJ will output D5.1 anyway (and how the above formats handle it (if they can) is unknown to me). On top of that, where would you get the D5.1 source music?...not from a DVD (DVD audio is unrippable (at least the D5.1 part of it is) at this point, AFAIK).

3. MJ will do it all but.....I use EAC to do ripping & encoding and MJ for player/DB functions.
IMO...EAC is a better ripper "out of the box" - but MJ can be set up to be equivalent (MJ has a secure mode like EAC, but it is not the default setting)

Xenno

[rocketsauce]

Just thought I'd add a little to what Xen posted.  

Right now I am leaning to WMA at 160kbps based on some stuff I've read.

The main reason to stay away from WMA is that the DRM (digital rights management) features that are built into the format could cause problems in the future depending on how much Microsoft implements DRM features in future versions of Windows and WMA.  MP3, OGG or MPC will give you equal or most likely better quality without the possibility of headaches in the future.

I will only be ripping my own CD collection, and not sharing them.

Since you won't be sharing files, consider using OGG (pretty much equal in sound quality to MP3, but has the potential to be better, is probably the best sound quality at low bitrates) or MPC (currently is considered to have the best sound quality of all the lossy encoders at high bitrates).  Use MP3 if you want to listen to your music on a portable player, although a few companies will most likely be adding OGG support to their portables in the near to medium future.  One shortcoming of MP3 is it's inability to playback files with no gaps (for example a DJ mix or a live recording) without the help of crossfade or gapless playback plug-ins.  OGG and MPC don't have this problem.  Also, OGG and MPC use better tagging systems than the ID3 specs used by MP3.

...I know I will use either 160kbps or 192 kbps bitrate...My concern is chiefly with audio quality...

Pretty much all of the lossy encoders produce higher quality when you use settings that encode in VBR (variable bitrate) rather than CBR (constant bitrate, which is what 160kbps or 192kbps is).  VBR encoding adjusts to the complexity of the music being encoded, so that more complex parts are encoded at higher bitrates and less complex parts are encoded at lower bitrates.  OGG and MPC are VBR by default and forcing them to use CBR will not produce files of the highest quality.  If you use MP3, you should use LAME for encoding.  It is generally considered to be the best MP3 encoder.  Both MJ and EAC use LAME by default.  LAME also produces the best quality when it encodes using VBR, unless you decide to encode at 320kbps, which is the highest quality setting for MP3.

Check out the Hydrogen Audio Forums for a lot of good info on audio compression regarding the various formats.

Rob

Hydrogen Audio Forums: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?s=7bf3dad29b43a590d3c5b06b4aa7c3c5&act=portal

Exact Audio Copy: http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/

Exact Audio Copy Forum: http://www.digital-inn.de/forumdisplay.php?forumid=14

Intro to Vorbis: http://grahammitchell.net/writings/vorbis_intro.html

[ronsou]

This is extremely helpful.   Thank you.   I'm not that concerned with the digital rights management because these are my own cd's that I am ripping, and I do not plan to share them.   I just want the convenience of a digital jukebox.   The VBR is very relevant though.   I do see WMA v9 (beta) does offer VBR.  

Let's say I go with OGG at high variable bitrate for the reasons you list.   But later, it becomes obvious that some other format has emerged as the winner/leader.   Is it likely I can convert my OGG encoded files to the other format in software to a quality essentially equal to ripping them all over again ?   If that is the case, I will likely go to OGG.   I realize no one can perfectly speculate on the future, but just want to know if anyone thinks right now such a software conversion will not work or at least not be a good idea.

Do I need or should I have somebody else's encoder as an addin to MediaJukebox to rip to OGG, or is everything built into the current "Plus" version just fine for me ?

Thanks very much to all who responded - answers were very well written, well thought out, and helpful.  I will visit the other forums you pointed me to.

[xen-uno]

Looking into my crystal ball I see long life and a bright future for Ogg...go for it.

Generally, transcoding from lossy to lossy is not a good idea. So if a new lossy format comes out...like XEN (eXtra spEcial eNcoding), then re-ripping would be best.

You can make the process easier, though. You can transcode from lossless (FLAC, APE) format to a Lossy format with no loss of quality. By doing so you eliminate the need to rip....but then you have to store them (lossless files are about half the size of their uncompressed wav counterpart).

MJ uses oggenc.exe which is the same one released by Xiph (Ogg's creators).

Xenno

[Xstatic]

I don't have a receiver with SPDIF input, but I will buy one if this is true.   I'd like to know before I go buy one.

Get one. I truly enjoy this kind of setup, especially when quality is an issue. However, when doing so, and thereby listening to your music through a hi-fi setup, all the flaws from a lossy encoder become much more audible.

Depending on your ears, this should make you more choosy of the encoder.
Between wma, mp3 and ogg, I would definetely choose ogg. Between those three + mpc, there is no question in my mind that I would choose mpc. It is without a doubt an even more transparent encoder than ogg.

Ogg has its primary forces in the lower and middle bitrates.

You also ask if you can reencode at a later time without losing a significant amount of quality - this exercise will also be more viable using mpc - because of the higher degree of transparency.

But it is all a question of what you can, or can't hear. There is a very nice software program called ABX, which is made for doing blind listening tests. This is a very cool way to see what you really can or can't tell from each other.

I spent a lot of days experiementing with this, quite tough!, but very rewarding, as I now know that I made the right choice for me.

MPC also comes with the MJ package, both as encoder and input plugin.

Good luck in your quest!
Jesper

[ronsou]

I just tried OGG.   The sound is indeed VERY good.   But the size at 'High' is 300% the size of WMA at 160kbps.   Even at "Normal/High" it is 40% larger than WMA at 160kbps.   Now, space is not my number one issue - audio quality is.   However, only audio quality to the extent it is discernable to the human ear - I dont want to use up my hard drive on something that even a really good ear can't tell the difference of.   So my basic question is what would be a recommendation for OGG quality setting, balancing trade offs of discernable quality vs space ?    I'm thinking 'normal/high' - possibly even just 'normal' ?     The full HIGH seems like it might be overkill for a home hobbyist collection ?   I think you've sold me on OGG - but now I want to decide on the size/quality tradeoff.  Any thoughts ?

Do you think its worth looking at the new WMA v9 VBR ?   If I install mediaplayer beta v9 from windowsmedia.com, will my "Rip CD" options in MediaJukebox then automatically have the option to encode WMA in VBR, or do I have to wait for a new release of MediaJukeBox ?   Or maybe WMA is just in a game of catchup with OGG anyway, so not worth even really considering , at least not at this time ?

Also, any thoughts to the one question I asked in original post as to whether Normalizing when I rip them is a good idea - or does it then distort the original work ?   It would be nice to not have to keep adjusting my volume during playback - but my first consideration is towards fidelity.

Thank you again.

[Scronch]

I think if you spend all that time encoding your CD's to a lossy format, you are making a mistake.  Here is my input, take it or leave it.

Buy more hard drive space.  It is very cheap.  Rip and encode all of your CD's to APE.  You will never have to rip your CD's again.  If you go to MP3 or OGG, mark my words: you will be re-ripping next year, or the year after that.  You can always encode from APE to a lower format, if, for example, you want to use a portable MP3 player (another reason NOT to go to OGG, imho).

Where to get the money for the hard drives?  Easy.  Don't go with an amp with a digital input.  Why?  Because the manufacturer still has to put an digital-to-analog (D-A) converter chip in the amp.  Typically, D-A chips in amps are CHEAP.  But you definitely don't want this conversion done in the horrible electrical environment within the PC housing (i.e. on a soundcard).  So buy yourself an external, dedicated D-A device.  There are several out there.  I am partial to the stereo-link, http://www.stereo-link.com.  Go to their site, click on Product Info, then on Measurements, then on each of the blue boxes on the left.  You will be convinced.  We run a stereo-link 1200 with excellent results.  You can feed the stereo analog output into any good quality amp (Yamaha, Nakamichi, etc, etc, etc, etc)--you probably already own one, so why throw your money away just to get a different one with a cheap D-A chip?

Some will disagree with me.  That's fine.  All I say is take the time to read the specs.  And don't buy anything unless they have a return policy--everyone's ears are different.

So buy more hard disk space, plus an external D-A converter (e.g. stereo-link), and rip everything to APE.  You won't regret it.

Almost forgot--NEVER rip any country music into a digital format.  You risk a fatal exception error (or your wife will throw your PC and all your whiskey in the back of your pickup truck, and drive away with it all).  twang twang

Scronch

[ronsou]

Interesting.  Another thing to look into.   Given my computer already has digital output, and I probably will get a new receiver anyway, and the "optical in" feature on today's receivers doesn't seem like it adds much expense, I will first try that route.   I can always get the converter you mention later if I'm not happy with it.   I will have a pretty long run from computer to stereo, so am a tad skeptical about doing the conversion to analog at the computer rather than at the stereo system due to loss from the long run (about 50 ft).

I will see how big an encoded "APE" is.   I have about 90 GB available and doubt I'll go over 400 cd's anytime soon.   And I could add a second hard drive if I do (I assembled this computer and have no hesitancy in adding another drive) - so I certainly agree with you about hard disk space is cheap and shouldn't be the prime concern.   And I am all for only ripping once, for ever and ever if thats possible.    While I don't want to spend money needlessly, the budget is not my prime concern either.    

But I DEFINITELY am in full agreement with you that country "music" will never touch this system !

Thank you.   I'll go do some testing with APE.

(I'm still interested in opinions on OGG quality vs size tradeoffs.   I have enough space to store my entire collection even at HIGH, but not sure if its worth doing so.   Especially if I might end up ripping them again in a couple years.)

[Scronch]

External D-A converters shouldn't have a problem at 50 ft.  For example, the stereo-link specs are good out to 80 ft.  See if you can get the D-A specs for the receiver (you want the frequency response curve for the D-A chip, not the amp), and compare them to the external devices.  I think you'll be surprised.

I wouldn't normalize during rip/encode.  You want your "master" APE copies to be just that--masters.  You can normalize at playback by using MJ's Replay Gain (you have to analyze your collection), or by using a plug-in like AudioStocker.  They work differently--read the help text, and search for the many discussions on this forum.

Scronch

[ronsou]

I am presently doing some testing of sizes vs quality of OGG, MPC, WMA and CDA (APE).      My initial conclusions seem to be pointing me towards either OGG or MPC.     Scronch's points about keeping masters as true masters are well made, but for me I just don't want to use THAT much hard drive space.    The CDA files (APE ripped) are just huge,  and I'd need another hard drive just for my current CD collection (300 discs - I thought 90GB would be more than enough.  And with any of the other formats it is.)    I've pretty much convinced myself that at normal/high OGG or MPC should be really sufficient for me forever - I don't think I'd ever really feel the need to re-rip.  And if I do, I can - I've been surprised that the task is actually much easier and less time consuming then I had thought.

I also appreciate the advice not to normalize when ripping, but rather at playback.  Makes perfect sense and I will go that route.

Initially, I'm going to try optical digital out from my computer to SPDIF optical digital in on a stereo receiver.   I plan to get a new receiver anyway, and a digital input looks pretty standard in the price range I'm looking at, so I don't see that I have much to lose by doing so.   And if I can avoid one more box (external converter), I'd prefer to.   But I will consider the external D-A converter later however.  

Does anyone have a recommendation of one or more stereo receivers with good D-A input/conversion in say the $500 price range ?   Or a good reason that such a price range should not be my target - that I really should go higher (or lower) ?

If there is interest, I will post my results for size required to rip the same Talking Heads album in various formats and bit rates (WMA, OGG, MPC, CDA), as well as my own non-scientific hearing tests.   (At higher levels, I can't tell a difference.)  

Right now, for my own needs, I've pretty much ruled out CDA (APE), MP3, and even WMA , unless someone really thinks the new WMA VBR is worth considering.  I seem to be heading towards either OGG or MPC, but still deciding between the two and on which quality level.

I greatly appreciate everyone's answers - I realize right now this is more opinion then science and no one answer is "right" for everyone.    This seems to be a very good forum - where people respond coolly with facts and well considered opinions, and not just emotionally.  Thank you.

[zevele10]

Look like you don't get it about WMA.

The Microsoft DMR may just make your files unplayable .
Period , no matter if you do not share it or any other stories.
You would not be able to play the files on your hard drive.
Ok ,as i say MAY ,one day,nothing sure but....

Beside this you are right about country.
It is just the mother music of this f..g white americans.
Both of you do not belong to this people ,so i understand you

[JimH]

.
It is just the mother music of this f..g white americans.
Both of you do not belong to this people ,so i understand you

It has a wider appeal than the American Redneck.  In fact, the American Redneck is a lot wider than that.  Some don't hate all who are different, just some of them.  Hatred knows no boundaries.  Comme les medecins sans frontieres.

[JimH]

et tiens (or whatever that word should be)!

f...g?

farming?
fathering?
frothing?

[ronsou]

Got it - WMA will be off the list. You're right that I missed the point.  And lest anyone take it too seriously, I was just going along with the joke about country music.  While I personally don't care for it, to each his own and I won't diss it.   Different strokes... and tolerance/respect for all.

[rocketsauce]

So my basic question is what would be a recommendation for OGG quality setting...

OGG uses a quality scale of -q 0.0 thru -q 10.0

-q 6 is generally considered to be a good setting for transparent OGG encoding.  Although I've noticed a few people over at HA prefer -q 7, -q 7.5 or -q 8

In MJ, rather than choosing Low, Normal/Low, etc from the quality drop down list for the OGG encoder, choose Custom, then click the Advanced button.  In the Command line put -q 6 or what ever -q setting you decide you want to use.

If you decide to use MPC (MPEGplus) either the Standard or Xtreme quality should be fine.  Although, I've noticed again over at HA, people are recommending using the --xlevel switch for MPC, so you could also choose Tweaked from the drop down list and in the Command Line put --standard --xlevel or --xtreme --xlevel

Rob

[zevele10]

COUNTRY ====FARMING of cause

Ronsou
Do not start to farm around about my post .
It is kind of game on this forum.
The funny thing is what i am a  f..g [frothing  most of the times] jew born in France.
Not really concerned by country...

Concerning format. Take time to rip let say 10-15 tracks in each of the format you think you would  like rip your cds to
I mean rip it in OGG-mp3 and MPC.
After that ,play them in random oder NOT STAYING in front of your computer.
Have a coffee in your sofa ,a look at your mail and so on.
If there is a format you do not like or one you like,your ears would tell you.
Better than to mess around in front of the computer changing song each 5 seconds

[ronsou]

Well, I've done a full circle - I think.    As Scronch recommended,   I'm now inclinced not to use a lossy format at all right now.   I think I'm just going to use APE, at least until I begin to have space issues.  Even then, maybe I'll just add another hard drive.    Since I'm going to be changing my stereo system anyway, I don't want to decide on any compressed format now as I can't hear the result on the ultimate system.   I'll stick with CDA at least until disk space becomes an issue.      Is it a correct assumption that if I've encoded my files with APE (cda), and later I decide to convert them to say OGG or MPC, that a software conversion in that case is essentially equivalent and just as good as re-ripping (since the original encoding was cda.)  ?

I have another question:   Digital SPDIF out from the computer is supposed to be better for long runs then analog.   But, I don't see where anyone sells a digital cable over 3m long ?   Also, is the term SPDIF used interchangeably for both coax or optical digital connections, or does it refer only to one or the other ?


Scronch - you got me on APE I think - maybe you'll eventually win me over with the external converter too !

[zevele10]

Concerning your first question,the answer is yes .
From APE you can convert to mp3  or any other format.
It is like a rip frm cd .
The good thing is you just have to set the convertion and go to bed.
In this case make sure that 'delete original file ' IS NOT CHECK.

I woul have  Stereo-link since long if able to find it here.
I have another setting than you :amp at one meter from the computer ,speakers at around 3 meters from te amp

[Scronch]

Your assumption about digital being better than analog for "long runs" is not completely valid.  For very long runs (miles), of course a digital signal is better, but it will require repeaters at regular intervals.  For computer applications, "long runs" typically mean less than 50 to 100 feet.  For many components, the output analog signal will stay within spec over those distances, provided you use good shielded cable.  Some digital outputs, such as USB, are not guaranteed over 5 meters, after which you have to start inserting repeaters.  You need to think this through before you invest in the set-up, or you may get occasional signal drop-outs, which will drive you crazy trying to troubleshoot.

This is from the stereo-link FAQ page:

http://www.stereo-link.com/stereolink.filereader?3dcee2a30b6c1c78271d424d361a06ad+EN/userpages/8#Q6

6 That all sounds nice, but my stereo is across the room from my computer

No problem. Each product comes with a 10 ft (3 meters) USB cable and 10 ft (3 meters) of shielded coaxial audio cable with gold plated connectors. The stereo-link is designed to drive much longer lengths of audio cable (80+ feet), so you can extend it as necessary - even into the next room, as long as you use good quality shielded cable. Visit our accessories page for the latest list of options. You can connect several individual lengths of cable together to get the length you need, using good quality phono jack couplers. For reference, 12 foot and 50 foot lengths of audio cable are commonly available at many electronic stores and, of course, on our accessories page.

You can also extend the USB cable by using a longer cable, up to 5 meters. For greater distances, you may choose a USB Active Extension from our Accessories page or a USB HUB between each section of USB cable in order to maintain reliability. Since the stereo-link does not draw any power from the USB, you can use the less expensive hubs for this purpose.

Good luck, and enjoy your audio set-up.

Scronch

[jaysee]

I have a SB soundcard with a SPDIF digital out, and I have a $500 Sony Surround Sound Reciever with a SPDIF digital in. I ran a standard RJ6 Coax 50ft cable from my computer to my Sony, put an RCA adapter on both ends of the coax cable, and connected the two devices together. This connection cost me about $10 for the cable and the rca adapters... and I have amazing digital sound over my main stereo speakers using the Sony DA converter.

I doubt wether I could tell the difference between the Sony D/A converter and an external decoder... but it sure sounds a hell of a lot better than RCA outputs from a computer.

I ripped all of my 800 CD collection to 160 CBR mp3s. Sounds fine to me, even over my good stereo. I chose MP3 over Oog and MP3+ because those options didn't exist when I did the rip 2 years ago, they aren't currently compatible with portables and car hard drive players, and I probably couldn't tell the difference anyway.

[Scronch]

I agree that D-A within an amp is much, much better than on a PC soundcard, and that an external D-A is probably only a little better than in an amp.  My advice for ronsou assumed he hadn't yet spent the money, and he had a good analog amp.  But he wants to buy a new amp, anyway.

Scronch

[ronsou]

Thanks - this is quite helpful.  I didn't know that SPDIF to RG-6 Coax adapters were made.   RG6 definitely wold be easier to work with - cutting to right length, fishing through walls etc, plus its way cheaper.   (The place with 60ft optical digital cable was charging over $125 for the cable.)   Since RG6 is data grade (used for satellite, etc) I assume this actually should work very well, as long as those adapters work ok.

[ronsou]

Jaysee -
  Where did you get adapters for SPDIF connectors to RG-6 coax ?     I tried the local radioshack - they never heard of such a thing.   And I tried the links above for digital cable providers, and dont seem them there either.

I've also looked at http://www.cablesamerica.com/ ,  and http://www.l-com.com and am not seeing such an item.

My computer digital out is a Toslink connector.

Thanks.

[jaysee]

There are two types of Digital Audio Cable... optical (toslink) and coax(spdif). The spdif coax cable uses RCA type female and male connectors.

So, to make a cheap 50 foot coax run I used std 75 ohm RG6 coax cable with coax cable connectors on each end. Then I attached coax to RCA male adapters from Radio shack to make the connection.

Note that this will not work for an optical digital output. It must be coaxial.

[ronsou]

Just fyi - as I was confused by optical S/PDIF, coax S/PDIF and "Toslink".   Here's what I learned.   If anyone spots an error, let me know.

Apparently S/PDIF does not necessarily mean coax.   My audio specs refer to it as "SPDIF" but its optical.   This site shows a picture of both SPDIF optical and RCA (to coax) connectors.    Mine are definitely the optical ones.

http://www.aopen.com/tech/techinside/spdif.htm

Here's a good site that explains S/PDIF cables and connectors and converters as well:

http://www.andrewkilpatrick.org/projects/spdif/

However, it appears to me that more typically, an optical S/PDIF is now called TOSLINK and ones with RCA jacks to coax are simply called S/PDIF.   But a spec that just says S/PDIF is ambiguous - it could be either.   (My audio spec says S/PDIF and is optical.)

Converters do exist to go between optical and coax - they seem to be $30 and up.   If I go the converter route, I will likely buy the CO2, which can be found for under $50.   Here's a review of converters, though I've found others.  And prices are below the MSRP on this review.  http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/Reviews/Converters/

Optical cables supposedly should have a repeater if over 15 meters.

Im tempted to just get the external D-A unit and not have to worry about it.   But, I'd like to try the digital to get surround sound.

[Sei]

Hi!

Having same plan as you have and having some experience with my own audio system, I'm tempted to write a few lines.

1) Using optical digital output from your PC rather than coaxial is good idea.  Both are same SPDIF, but due to the terrible EMI(electro magnetic interference) inside of PC, the jitter characteristic of digital output is worse with coaxial. Toslink, the optical is electrically isolated, so suffer less for jitter of digital output. (You may already know.)

2) Next, if you can buy good quality Optical-to-coax coverter, then you can use digital coaxial cable for 10 ft, as you planned. Basically using long digital cable is not recommended, but if your DAC/analog audio amp/speaker is not very revealing, it may be O.K., I think.

For my music system, I use some good quality digital audio system, composed of P1A (digital processor for resolution enhancement(16bit to 24 bit) by interpolation/speaker correction for my B&W N805) and P3A DAC(both by Perpetual Technologies), and tube amp heavily modded by me. I recently changed my digital cable(3 ft) and it made Big improvement.

But by using a good quality digital cable, the degradation wil be minimal, I guess. One I bought recently was from Zoalla( http://www.zaolla.com/zaolla_digital.html). 3 ft was not that expensive but 25 ft one is quite expensive...

Anyway, I'm very anxious to know what will be the result of your project.  Please let us know!

[xen-uno]

>Using optical digital output from your PC rather than coaxial is good idea

There is error correction built into the PCM stream both optically or electrically. You could throw a nice sine wave on the computer end, put a scope on the decoded output after the DA converter, and you will not see a difference between the two. Digital streams are like satellite TV...if you get a signal then picture quality is as good as it gets...if you don't...no picture. It comes down to a matter of deniro's...how much do you want to spend?

The above assumes that you have good signal strength with either transmission method. Of course, good cables help for one reason...less signal attenuation. Heavier gauge center conductor (copper (best) or copper plated steel) and 100% shielding for electrical, glass instead of plastic for optical.

Xenno

[ronsou]

I will let you know.   Basically I am trying to get my plan all set and equipment bought before Thanksgiving, when I have my brother coming into town and we will pull wires that weekend.   So the day after Turkey is my plan to go live.   My biggest remaining issue revolves around this cabling issue.   I want to locate the surround stereo system in my living room.   However, in general, my computers are upstairs and living room downstairs.   I was going to just run a digital audio cable from computer upstairs to stereo downstairs, and use WinXP remote desktop from my laptop (wireless 802.11b) for monitor, mouse, and keyboard when in living room.   The remote desktop works great to control mediajukebox - much smarter I think in this setup just to remote the UI rather than stream the audio or share the files.

Given these cabling issues, I am now more inclined to move the computer I will use as the audio server down to the living room.   Its a mini-PC (Shuttle SS51G) that I assembled and its a great little computer.   Its very small and whisper quiet.    
http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/Motherboards/shuttle_ss51g.shtml   Fortunately I know a lot more about computer issues in general then digital audio issues.  (I'm a software developer - but nothing to do with audio.)

My only issue with doing that is I'd rather not have a computer monitor downstairs in the living room.  Since I don't need a great output, I might just hook it to the TV via a TV-out for a workable monitor, and then continue to use my wireless laptop to actually control it.

I do think that WinXP's remote desktop to the computer actually hooked up to one's stereo system is great - a full UI from any computer, even wireless, beats the very limited functions of a simple remote.  

If I do move the computer down to living room, then I will have very short digital cable run.   That issue goes away.  Its just the issue of having a computer there without any true monitor - a "headless machine" that I need to test before going this route.

[Scronch]

So the day after Turkey is my plan to go live.

In that case, this is crucial for both the digital and analog portions of your set-up...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
WASH YOUR HANDS!!!  

[brickf]

This has been a helpful thread. Thanks to all.

For those who are ripping APE, what quality setting are you using? Do the qualities represent different files sizes or the speed of the rip?

[ronsou]

I've just been using Normal.   ExtraHigh made files a tad bigger - not a huge difference.   I didn't notice a big time difference, but I didn't put a stopwatch on it.   If you find a good reason to use ExtraHigh, let me know.

On another topic since a couple people have asked to be updated on progress, Scronch's comments made me look closely at receivers D-A converter specs.   In the price range I was targeting (sub $500), the best thing I see is the Panasonic SAHE200K.   It has 4 digital optical in, 1 digital coax in.   Its D-A converter is described as follows, which appears to be easily the best in this class that I have seen, and higher even then most of the external D-A units.    I also wanted an A-B,A+B capability  - many of the surround units in this price range do not offer it.  Its about $470 from circuit city.    

I'm going to test everything out in one room though with cable lengths equal to what I would use.   I will go optical digital from my Shuttle SS51G to it.    If all goes well, I'll pull cables and get house wired over thanksgiving.   That brings up one more question:   Recommended speaker wire gauge:  AW12 or AW14 ?      (I've found speaker wire way cheaper from ramelectronics.net than say Home Depot or MonsterCable of equal grade on net.)   e.g. 500 ft of AW-12 for $99.   I figure AW-12 is AW-12, whether it says "Monster Cable" or not.   Anyone disagree ?

D/A Converter of Panasonic SA-HE200K:

"High Quality 192kHz/24-bit Audio D/A Converter*
The SA-HE200 offers a 192kHz/24-bit D/A converter to take full adavantage of the delicate musical nuances reproduced during multi-source re-mastering. This same D/A converter is used in professional audio equipment. Boasting the lowest noise level in the industry, a dynamic range of 122dB and 0.0007% THD, this D/A Converter helps assure optimum software performance. "

[rocketsauce]

For those who are ripping APE, what quality setting are you using?

The settings in APE are not quality settings, they are compression settings.  Since APE is lossless, the quality, no matter which setting you use, is always equal to the original.  

Fast will take the least amount of time to compress, but will generally produce the largest file sizes.  Extra High will produce slightly smaller files, but takes much longer to compress.  Also, Extra High requires more system resources for playback than the other settings.  Most people probably use either Normal or High.

Rob