Digitizing your music collection--Ask the Editors
If there's a lesson to be learned from this week's MP3 Mailbox Monday, it's that flattery will get you everywhere. And that it's hip to be square. Oh, also, there's something about digitizing music and recycling CDs in here, too, though I like to delude myself into thinking you stop by for my self-indulgent-yet-somehow-still-witty intro chatter. What do you mean witty, you say? Ha! Good one. Read on for the skinny.
Q: I just joined CNET--great site, just love it! Here's the thing: I'm old, I'm out of it, and I need help. I only started downloading music a year ago, and now I'm hooked. Love having digital music and want to get rid of my physical CDs. I work non-stop and don't have time to do this myself. I've looked into ripping services and wonder if anyone can recommend one service over another? They all seem pretty much the same as far as cost so I'm looking for actual positive experience with a specific service. I'm in the New York City area but it's fine to ship to a distant location if it's a good service.
Also, what format should I convert to--MP3 or AAC? I have an iPhone, a Mac laptop, and external back up (a time machine). And what do people do with their old CDs? Are there places to donate, recycle, etc.? Thanks a ton!--Clare, via e-mail

One of many services that takes the work out of CD ripping.
A: We haven't done a comparison of CD-ripping services at CNET, but I found one over at Digital Trends that is nicely laid out and includes a wide variety of options. (As usual, I also invite other CNET users to leave feedback below.)
Now, the question of format is a good one, and I'm afraid the answer isn't entirely straightforward. What format to use depends on your purposes. If you're looking for archive-quality audio, lossless is the way to go. The most common lossless format is WAV, but in your case, I'd recommend Apple Lossless, which offers some compression while still preserving the data of the file. (This means the Apple Lossless file will be smaller than the WAV, but will arguably sound just as good.) Apple Lossless is supported by iTunes and most iPods, including the iPhone.
However, lossless isn't all roses. The main issue is the large file size--it's significantly larger than an AAC or MP3 ripped at the highest possible bit rate. For example, a 4-minute track ripped in Apple Lossless will be about 29.5MB, while that same file ripped at 320Kbps AAC will be around 9.5MB. (As a WAV, it's 41.2MB.) That means you'll be able to fit a lot less of them on your iPhone or hard drive. And one more thing to consider: Apple Lossless isn't a highly compatible format, meaning a relatively limited number of devices can play it back. A larger variety of portables support AAC--Sony Walkmans, select Creative Zens, and the Zune among them--but MP3 is by far the most universal format. If you're considering branching off of the iPod tree in the future, a more universal format may be more appealing.

Operation Gratitude takes more than just CDs.
All that being said, you can always convert from Apple Lossless to a "lossy" file type such as AAC or MP3 for your portable player, but that is an extra step for you. However, my thought is that the extra effort is worth it if you want to keep your main collection in the highest possible digital quality. Now, if you're not concerned with the best audio, you could get the CDs ripped straight to AAC or MP3 at 320Kbps--either one is a reasonable choice, but I'd keep the bit rate high.
As for what to do with the CDs once you're done, you can donate them to places like the Goodwill or Salvation Army, or other organizations, such as Operation Gratitude, which sends care packages to our troops. Used book stores and libraries may also accept donations of media. Or you can recycle them.
Addendum: as a commenter below so astutely points out, you should technically hold onto any hard backups for legal reasons--such is the tetchiness of digital copyright law. You can, of course, do as you see fit, and civil liberties discussions abound should you wish to join the fray.
- It's okay to copy music onto an analog cassette, but not for commercial purposes.
- It's also okay to copy music onto special Audio CD-R's, mini-discs, and digital tapes (because royalties have been paid on them) - but, again, not for commercial purposes.
- Beyond that, there's no legal "right" to copy the copyrighted music on a CD onto a CD-R. However, burning a copy of CD onto a CD-R, or transferring a copy onto your computer hard drive or your portable music player, won't usually raise concerns so long as:
- The copy is made from an authorized original CD that you legitimately own
- The copy is just for your personal use. It's not a personal use - in fact, it's illegal - to give away the copy or lend it to others for copying.
- The owners of copyrighted music have the right to use protection technology to allow or prevent copying.
- Remember, it's never okay to sell or make commercial use of a copy that you make.
MP3 Mailbox Monday is a recurring feature where I answer a selection of questions about MP3 players and accessories, such as headphones, speakers, and music services and software. Check back often to see if the advice presented here might be of some use to you, or send your questions directly to me. (Note: We never include last names, but if you prefer to remain completely anonymous, please state as much in your e-mail.)
For more than five years, Jasmine France has covered a variety of tech products for CNET--from scanners to keyboards to GPS devices--but she's happiest where she is now: sitting atop a pile of MP3 players, "testing" every music service known to man, and jamming a variety of earbuds in every shape and color into her absurdly small ears. E-mail Jasmine.

Donald Bell is an electronic musician, a veteran record store employee, and a fearless hardware hacker. He's also CNET's Senior Editor for MP3 and digital audio.
Jasmine France is CNET's resident digital audio doyenne, writing and editing product reviews, crave blogs, and feature stories on all things MP3. And if you need advice on headphones, she's your girl.

It's also a good idea to hang onto the disc in case your storage device crashes...
And yes, the writer should have mentioned FLAC IMO.
As for music manager try MediaMonkey - plays all the formats you could wish for, and has a logic that is good (but not perfect) for classical music. If you are careful enough when ripping to record composers, genre, etc. you can later on filter or classify by those. Worth a try, and it's for free!
As for organizing digital music, it's pretty simple. Most ripping software and services will automatically arrange things in Artist then Album folders, so you can even just browse in Windows Explorer (or Mac Finder). You could further make overarching Genre folders, should you choose, though that isn't necessary if you find a good music management software that you like (and all your ID3 tags are in order).
When it comes to the jukebox/management apps, it's really a matter of finding what works for you personally. I always recommend trying several (they are free, after all) until you find one that fits your needs. Several programs, such as WinAmp (http://www.download.com/Winamp/3000-2141_4-10890329.html), even have skins that will let you adjust the overall look-and-feel of the app. Standard jukeboxes such as Windows Media Player (http://www.download.com/Windows-Media-Player/3000-2139_4-10600080.html) and iTunes (http://reviews.cnet.com/music-and-recording/apple-itunes-8/4505-3669_7-33248682.html) do a "fine" job of organization in my opinion, and people rave about MediaMonkey (http://www.download.com/MediaMonkey-Standard/3000-2141_4-10903402.html). Also, check out Donald Bell's software comparison story here: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-12519_7-10104294-49.html?tag=mncol;title. It deals specifically with programs that work with the iPod, but has some good general info.
Unfortunately, none of this really addresses the booklet issue. Album art is being handled better and better, and you can input liner notes into the Comment section of an ID3v2 tag, but generally have to do that by hand. Not precisely what I'd call "fun." :)
As for the one used in the comments, FLAC, that's Free Lossless Audio Codec: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flac.
Second, legally speaking, I wish CNET would do a better job of clarifying the copyright concerns that are truly at play here. For purposes of copyright law, the reason it is a good idea to hold on to the original CDs is not because you need them to prove you own the music (although that helps), and it's not to serve as an additional backup in case your storage fails (although that's certainly a good idea as well). The reason you must hold on to old CDs once they are ripped is that by ripping them, you have now created two copies of the music (CD and ripped file) where before there was only one, and while that is perfectly legal so long as you are the only one in possession of both copies, it becomes a copyright violation when you keep one copy for yourself and give the other copy to someone else. This is true whether you give that other person the CD or the ripped files. This seems like it should be common sense, regardless of how you feel about copyright law (and I think it is deeply broken and needs to be fixed), but for some reason it is not.
For purposes of copyright law, once you have ripped your CDs into music files, you have two choices: you may either retain the CDs in your own possession, or you may destroy them. I think it is reckless for CNET to even suggest donating them, or letting a friend borrow them, because with precious few exceptions, any time they leave your possession after you've made a second working copy, you are violating copyright law. Even with Jasmine's addendum, this article comes very close to suggesting otherwise, and I think that's a disservice to CNET readers.
One important thing to consider (and not mentioned in this article or the review link) when choosing a ripping service is metadata quality. After all, though it can be tedious, anyone with a bit of extra time can rip an average sized collection of CDs. The real pain comes when trying to standardize and organize the data that comes from the free data services such as Gracennote via iTunes. Ripping services pay extra for better, more organized data. Our company also goes the extra mile of running additional scripts and then in the last step hand grooming and genre mapping (which weeds out redundant genres) to provide a super clean final product.
As for the legal aspects, the commentary is correct - you are required by law to retain the original CD if you have created a copy to use on a computer or MP3 player which is why ripping services send all CDs back to the customer.
BrandiesGrad is correct about the legal mumbo jumbo, but I don't think CNET is doing its readers any disservice. The reality is few, if any of us follow the letter of the law regarding digital music management. And with the recent Myspace case out of California, it has been established that anybody who violates a terms of use agreement (including the one on this site that I wager nobody posting here ever read) is guilty of a felony. According to the government, nearly everybody who uses the internet or listens to digital music is a felon. As such, what CNET should be pointing out is instances where "illegal" actions could realistically have consequences. Selling or giving away CD's is not one of those instances.
I got tired of finding players that couldn't resolve a Lossless format I was using. I tried them all; Apple Lossless, FLAC, and WMA Lossless.
I ran into brick walls with each format. If it wasn't playback problems, it was DRM restrictions.
I never had this problem with vinyl, CDs or tapes. They just played; no questions asked.
WAVs are nearly universal; like MP-3s. So, with a few exceptions, I don't have to worry about them NOT playing.
Plus, I can get a 1TB drive for $100 so there is no logical excuse to marginalize the music so it will all fit on a hard drive.
Don't shrink the music, get more space.
-
by wmyinzer
December 6, 2008 2:43 PM PST
- Why is the AAC format so widely advertised as the format to use on here?
-
Reply to this comment
-
(21 Comments)The true quality difference between mp3, AAC, and WMA files is indistinguishable. Why not convert to mp3? Unless the man is truely a music fanatic then advise him to use either WMA Lossy or AAC Lossy depending on which devices he wants to use them on. Maybe the WAV format would be better..