ms300 ripping to wav instead FLAC!

gustavog

New Member
Got my new MS300 yesterday. So far I'm getting acquainted with it. Seems well built except for the cd tray, which appears to be quite flimsy.

Anyway, before I commit to ripping my cd collection, I've noticed that when I rip to FLAC (that set as default on the options menu), all tracks of a cd are .wav and only the last two are .flac. The .wav tracks are, of course, larger than they would be in .flac. Why is this happening? If I rip individual tracks of a disc then I get the .flac files.

Don't want to waste space on my ms300 and those .wav files are stopping me from going further.
 
gustavog
I have a MS300 too. I noticed that but after a while all the files are stored as FLACS. I do not know if the mS300 rips first to wav and then to flac to expedit the ripping process or what. But after ripping more than 100 cd's I can see all of them are FLACs.

On the other hand the manufacturers of the squeezbox have a service for ripping. It cots about 120 bucks for 100 cd's ripped to FLAC. It will save you a lot of time if you hava a big collection as myself (1300 and counting)

Regards
Alberto
 
Last edited:
Hmm, strange. But after how many discs all the files are stored as FLAC. And, what happend to the files that were stored as .wav. Did you re-rip them?

Unfortunately I am in Mexico, so I'll have to endure the ripping myself.

BTW, do you have a monitor or something attached to your ms300? I am looking for a very small lcd but the smallest at a decent price is 13"
 
The MS300 rips to wav and then takes time to put on the HD as Flack. If the three red leds are flashing do not turn the 300 off as it is coverting to Flac for the HD. Flac takes a lot of time on record but is fast on playback or burn.

Ron-C
 
Thanks Ron-c. Yes, after a while I checked the files and they are all .flac now. Good, I can start ripping now!
 
Gustavog
Yes I attached an old LCD monitor to the mS300. I did not want to use my projector every time I played the MS300.
I found a converter from composite video to VGA in ebay for 50 bucks. It works great
Regards
 
arebalos said:
On the other hand the manufacturers of the squeezbox have a service for ripping. It cots about 120 bucks for 100 cd's ripped to FLAC. It will save you a lot of time if you hava a big collection as myself (1300 and counting)

No disrespect to the Squeezebox or its manufacturer, but I have to say that I would NOT do this. There are significant audible differences between two rips from even the same software with different options checked. The differences between software used are even more dramatic. There is no way I would trust someone else to rip my discs if I was concerned about sound quality. If someone is doing it for you, they are going to do it the fastest way possible with sound quality an afterthought. Just use the MS300.
 
hmmm, but FLAC is a lossless compression scheme....if you rip in FLAC is like zipping an archive, you have an identical bit by bit copy after you de-compress. If the format is not FLAC... well the MS300 will not be able to read it.
I would not do it with Mp3, but I do not see why not with FLAC.
 
arebalos said:
hmmm, but FLAC is a lossless compression scheme....if you rip in FLAC is like zipping an archive, you have an identical bit by bit copy after you de-compress. If the format is not FLAC... well the MS300 will not be able to read it.
I would not do it with Mp3, but I do not see why not with FLAC.

This is a classic example of a paradox for audiophiles. You see all bits are essentially being read by all CD Players. Why then do different burns sound different depending on the blank media?

I'm not going to argue with you because I've done it. I've been using a hard drive based transport for a couple years. It would just bug me b/c there are stark differences in rips. I want to rip the way I want to rip, which is the way I know the rips sound best. Some other guy ripping won't care.
 
Don't need to get angry. Bits are bits. Of course you can find differences depending of cables used, DAC's, jitter, etc.
If you believe that there is a difference in a FLAC (not an MP3 that is another story) ripped in your MS300 and the exaclty same file ripped by another machine and can detect it a in double blind test using the same MS300 to play it, well you have my congratulatuions. I done, not difference to me.
Just in case my system is a mc602 and a 252 bi-amping a pair of ls360, a MX135, MVP861, MC207 and the MS300.
Cheers
 
arebalos said:
Don't need to get angry. Bits are bits. Of course you can find differences depending of cables used, DAC's, jitter, etc.
If you believe that there is a difference in a FLAC (not an MP3 that is another story) ripped in your MS300 and the exaclty same file ripped by another machine and can detect it a in double blind test using the same MS300 to play it, well you have my congratulatuions.

Well thanks! :thmbsp:

No one's angry. It's hard to infer tone from a forum post.

You should be thankful you can't tell a difference.
 
Back
Top Bottom