maximum external HDD supported by DENON HD2500

[Grahame Case]

I would rip them at 320kbps MP3

Me too, WAV is overkill on space regardless of how much storage is nowadays.

I have never got a perfect reproduction when ripping to MP3 - maybe it is just me. i'm a bit particular when it comes to sound

I would rather use Vorbis OGG but i know it is not supported by the player i intend to purchase when i go digital.

[Corabar Steve]

Why not find somebody with a HD2500 reasonably close & take your singing drainpipe for a visit. Rip the same track in both formats & do a direct comparison.

Personally, don't think there will be that much (if any) audible difference (but it would be nice to find out for sure. Although there is no noticeable difference between the 2 on my Yamaha / Class D set up, the Bose is theoretically a higher spec system & may show up any differences I don't notice through my set up)

[Shakermaker Promotions]

Most of the tracks on my Denon have been done at 320kbps. I have just short of 12,000 now (still missing loads of stuff). I do have some on there at 160kbps and even 128kbps and you can't really notice the difference. I have also noticed that there are a couple on there, and I don't understand this...but they show up as 48kbps but still sound great?

Wav files, in my opinion are only slightly better than 320kbps but take up much more space. I personally think that if you are using a 500gb external HD, in reality you should be getting everything on there that you need with ease and have a duplicate for back up. With reference to the internal HD on the system...I hardly use that but have it nearly full with stuff that is needed (The classics etc should the external go down but then again, I have a duplicate external HD so I am covered).

[Grahame Case]

definitely thinking that ripping to WAV is a good starter for master copies, then converting later to MP3 for transfer to portable HDD

will do some play tests on my BOSE through my current personal MP3 Player - i know its not a HD2500 - but it'll give an idea, both being digital sources.

[Penfold42]

Why not find somebody with a HD2500 reasonably close & take your singing drainpipe for a visit. Rip the same track in both formats & do a direct comparison.

LMFAO.........

.....you should get what you want.

[Solitaire Events Ltd]

definitely thinking that ripping to WAV is a good starter for master copies, then converting later to MP3 for transfer to portable HDD

Have you got a lot of time on your hands then?

[rob1963]

Have you got a lot of time on your hands then?

Probably not as much as ME!

[Grahame Case]

yes, no bookings for 2009 so far, i have a lot of time on my hands, which is why i'm spending a lot of time after work each day researching.

[Vectis]

definitely thinking that ripping to WAV is a good starter for master copies, then converting later to MP3 for transfer to portable HDD.

Mostly these days I buy downloads for new material, but if I stumble across an outstanding album (e.g.'s recently being Beyonce, Glasvegas & Grace Jones) I'll get a physical copy for ripping.

All my historical CD collection is ripped WAV and stored on a RAID SAN (for personal use mind, Mr ProDub... ) but I then make a 256k mp3 from it for road use.

I've tried many permutations and systems and I can't for the life of me tell the difference between 256k and 320k. 192k - 256k is a very different animal and 128k is just total pants at high volumes.

In these days of 10 pence per gig, there's no reason to skimp on the quality. It's not something you want to go back and do again!!

[Solitaire Events Ltd]

yes, no bookings for 2009 so far, i have a lot of time on my hands, which is why i'm spending a lot of time after work each day researching.

The point I am trying to make is that it takes a great deal of time ripping CD and I can't see the point ripping to wav and then to Mp3s after that!

I have ripped my CDs 3 times now (for various reasons) and know how mind numbingly boring it is!