Any possibility you could use a PC instead of a Mac? dBpoweramp would then be an excellent choice.
If you are stuck with Apple then why not use ALAC instead of FLAC?
Disclaimer: not an appleware user. I ripped thousands of CDs with dBpoweramp for Windows. (Hacked together an AutoIT script for automation at the time BatchRipper was still in very unfinished beta.) Indeed, dBpoweramp and foobar2000 are my main reasons for not using *n*x at home. (Together with the fact that lots of GNU utilities are ported to Billware in recent years, either natively or by Cygwin.)
I have a new Nimbie autoloader and have to convert thousands (I kid you not) of CDs to FLAC.
Then I suppose you are using http://www.broadexsystems.com/products/qqgettray.htm (http://www.broadexsystems.com/products/qqgettray.htm) ? According to that site, it supports XLD. But according to http://www.acronova.com/product.php?id=2&n=software (http://www.acronova.com/product.php?id=2&n=software) , you could get Max working as well. I would certainly have attempted one I (myself!) could get to work.
1) Is Max or XLD my best bet?
XLD has AccurateRip, and I wouldn't do a rip job without that (at least not for my own CDs). Max seems not to support that. However, I don't really understand why Mr. Booth has both http://sbooth.org/Rip (http://sbooth.org/Rip) with AccurateRip http://sbooth.org/Max (http://sbooth.org/Max) without (at least, seemingly without) ... and as I don't run the fruitware, I cannot check.
According to http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...n_of_CD_rippers (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Comparison_of_CD_rippers) , XLD supports cross-pressing verification. It isn't stated whether Rip does.
2) What settings should be made for FLAC? (there are few options I don't fully understand)
Like -0 vs -5 vs -8? I would go for -8 even though the space saved isn't much. It does take a bit longer time, but you are leaving it to itself.
You must make a choice of image file + cuesheet vs single tracks, though. Search for pros and contras. It seems that most of us prefer single tracks. However, that will usually not carry over index point information.
3) Any other advice on how to do this in the most methodic way?
- Pre-emphasis, for those pesky CDs which are mastered with that 'feature'. XLD supports it, but I don't know whether it logs it unless you write cuesheet.
- In any case, you should probably turn on as much logging as possible.
- Would you want to have the EnhancedCDs' data sessions copied too?
- The metadata sources have several imperfections, and you should sort your CDs in advance. (1) Leave various artists compilations for themselves and rip them separately with its own separate folder/file naming scheme. Do not trust the metadata providers to offer the correct information on Artist vs Albumartist, and certainly not whether it indeed is a various artists comp at all. (2) Keep remasters/reissues in a separate pile too. You may have opinions on whether the dating should be according to release of this particular edition (in which case you won't get any CDs with 1960's and 1970's years, right ...) or of the original ideas. Guess what, those who submit to the metadata providers have opinions on that too, and they have different opinions. So, first rip those which are 'first releases', then review years and fix as appropriate. Then rip the reissues/remasters/whatever (subdivide as much as you like, maybe even nonremastered reissues vs remastered vs remixed vs rerecorded (yeah it happens (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diary_of_a_Madman_(album)#Controversy)). Give all of these an appropriate tag (e.g. <MYCUSTOMTAG_RELEASETYPE>) and then redate for consistency, and if applicable rename according to your rule of choice.
- I would use the CDDB_ID as part of the album name. Otherwise, you might risk naming conflicts and accidental overwriting. At least if you don't amend album titles with [2002 remaster] and such.
Thank you kindly for the detail. I'm going to post my XLD preferences so that someone such as yourself with the expertise to assess the general settings as well as any potential XLD user can comment. While i"m looking forward to this process, I have to say I'm still a bit nervous but gather I'll have to just dive in soon.
XLD settings located at:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gc79gydprn1fqf3/pbu13k6mA-/XLD (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gc79gydprn1fqf3/pbu13k6mA-/XLD)
Disclaimer: not an appleware user. I ripped thousands of CDs with dBpoweramp for Windows. (Hacked together an AutoIT script for automation at the time BatchRipper was still in very unfinished beta.) Indeed, dBpoweramp and foobar2000 are my main reasons for not using *n*x at home. (Together with the fact that lots of GNU utilities are ported to Billware in recent years, either natively or by Cygwin.)
I have a new Nimbie autoloader and have to convert thousands (I kid you not) of CDs to FLAC.
Then I suppose you are using http://www.broadexsystems.com/products/qqgettray.htm (http://www.broadexsystems.com/products/qqgettray.htm) ? According to that site, it supports XLD. But according to http://www.acronova.com/product.php?id=2&n=software (http://www.acronova.com/product.php?id=2&n=software) , you could get Max working as well. I would certainly have attempted one I (myself!) could get to work.
1) Is Max or XLD my best bet?
XLD has AccurateRip, and I wouldn't do a rip job without that (at least not for my own CDs). Max seems not to support that. However, I don't really understand why Mr. Booth has both http://sbooth.org/Rip (http://sbooth.org/Rip) with AccurateRip http://sbooth.org/Max (http://sbooth.org/Max) without (at least, seemingly without) ... and as I don't run the fruitware, I cannot check.
According to http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...n_of_CD_rippers (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Comparison_of_CD_rippers) , XLD supports cross-pressing verification. It isn't stated whether Rip does.
2) What settings should be made for FLAC? (there are few options I don't fully understand)
Like -0 vs -5 vs -8? I would go for -8 even though the space saved isn't much. It does take a bit longer time, but you are leaving it to itself.
You must make a choice of image file + cuesheet vs single tracks, though. Search for pros and contras. It seems that most of us prefer single tracks. However, that will usually not carry over index point information.
3) Any other advice on how to do this in the most methodic way?
- Pre-emphasis, for those pesky CDs which are mastered with that 'feature'. XLD supports it, but I don't know whether it logs it unless you write cuesheet.
- In any case, you should probably turn on as much logging as possible.
- Would you want to have the EnhancedCDs' data sessions copied too?
- The metadata sources have several imperfections, and you should sort your CDs in advance. (1) Leave various artists compilations for themselves and rip them separately with its own separate folder/file naming scheme. Do not trust the metadata providers to offer the correct information on Artist vs Albumartist, and certainly not whether it indeed is a various artists comp at all. (2) Keep remasters/reissues in a separate pile too. You may have opinions on whether the dating should be according to release of this particular edition (in which case you won't get any CDs with 1960's and 1970's years, right ...) or of the original ideas. Guess what, those who submit to the metadata providers have opinions on that too, and they have different opinions. So, first rip those which are 'first releases', then review years and fix as appropriate. Then rip the reissues/remasters/whatever (subdivide as much as you like, maybe even nonremastered reissues vs remastered vs remixed vs rerecorded (yeah it happens (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diary_of_a_Madman_(album)#Controversy)). Give all of these an appropriate tag (e.g. <MYCUSTOMTAG_RELEASETYPE>) and then redate for consistency, and if applicable rename according to your rule of choice.
- I would use the CDDB_ID as part of the album name. Otherwise, you might risk naming conflicts and accidental overwriting. At least if you don't amend album titles with [2002 remaster] and such.