I have decided to retire my collection of audio CDs .I have about 80. If I transfer them all to solid state memory, how many sticks do i need?
Are you going to compress them or are you looking at keeping them in uncompressed audio files?
If it’s the former, then the answer is “one.”
If it’s the latter, you’re looking at about 60 gigabytes, so a few more.
80 CDs is really nothing in terms of storage space.
The rule of thumb I used, for average quality is about 1MB/min (uncompressed CD is about 10MB/min) and high quality is about 2MB/min, you can get a lot higher if you go lossless. So, on the low end, with 80 60-minute albums, you’re talking just under 5GB. Even on the highest end, you’re only looking at 50GB with no compression at all. The question is, what quality is important to you? That will determine how much space you need.
I have 100+ on about 64GB with minimal compression.
I still buy CDs, though. I like having th option of actually owning the music, as opposed to owning it for as long as the EULA says I’m allowed to own it.
Here are some more detailed numbers- each CD is roughly 80 minutes and 700 mb, or 0.7 gb, so 60 of those is about 42 gigabytes worth of uncompressed music.
**Blaster Master’s ** rule of thumb is very acccurate for MP3 and AAC format compressed files, so you could probably figure each CD would compress down to about 70-80 mb of compressed music, which gives you a little less than 5 (4.8 to be exact).
So a single 64 gb stick ought to do you with plenty of room left over, if you store them uncompressed, or a single 16 gb stick (dirt-cheap) should do you for compressed ones.
I think I’d put the memory on one of your computer’s hard drives, since 42 gb is chump change, and then back it up using CrashPlan or something like that, and just use the memory stick for transport, myself.
For some reason I was thinking that a CD was 750 megabytes, not 700.
You will need at least two sets, so you have one as a backup if you lose the other.
Each CD is approx 700 MB, so you’ll need 80 x .7 = 56 GB, so two 64 GB drives would do it.
USB thumb drives are prone to loss and breakage. I would not keep my only copy of something important and hard to replace on them.
How Many Gigabites of [del]Memory[/del] Storage Space Do I Need?
Thumb drives do not contain “memory”.
“Memory” is RAM.
Unless you intend to load all of them into a soundwave editing program, simultaneously, you do not need to be concerned about memory. (And in fact mostly not even then; that’s what virtual memory is for)
Yeah, I know… insisting on this distinction was a lost cause in 1997 and it hasn’t gotten any less loster.
From my experience you need at least 30 memories.
I’d say that ship sailed and sunk in October 1998 when Sony started selling the “Memory Stick”, ranging in capacity from 4MB to 128MB, and that nomenclature has stuck to later models. Modern USB drives contain what is widely called “flash memory”… “flash storage”, not so much, unless it’s in a package designed to replace a computer hard drive.
Rip one CD and listen to it and see if you like the bitrate you chose. If you don’t, delete and try again.
Once you find the bitrate you like, look at the file size of the album you ripped (right click on the folder, choose “properties”) and multiply by 80.
And as long as we’re being pedantic, the OP is talking about “gigabytes”. The “gigabite” is what happens when a billion-headed hydra chomps down with all of its mouths at once.
And it’s pronounced ‘jiga-bytes’
Not in my house!
The reality is that there isn’t really any long term storage solution which isn’t prone to loss in the end. I do wonder the lifespan of our civilsations information will be as it transfers onto magnetic discs. But in reality, you want to keep something for 20 years, well, a well kept DVD (not sure about Blu Ray) might work. I’ve had a lot of magnetic hard discs fail and lose things over the years. Not so sure of Solid State, I’ve been told when they fail, they fail to write. Tape might be the best but never trusted that myself. Too many old audio or VHS tapes chewed back in the day…
But as for ‘memory’, yes, we need to change people back to use the correct term ‘storage’. Just because someone got it wrong in Japan years ago, does not mean we need to let it go…
FWIW, as far as I know the US DOD and DOE still largely use tapes for backup, even with their modern systems, and not just because of inertia.
Modern tape drives aren’t exactly the cheapest thing you can find, though, the cheapest I’m turning up is around $500, and while cheaper than an HDD the backup tapes themselves aren’t exactly for the frugal buyer either (though just one would likely be enough for the OP).
Eh… it’s all the same thing anyway, just with different speed/cost differentials. Registers are fast, and expensive per kb, while tape is extremely slow, but very, very cheap per kb. Everything else falls somewhere in the middle.
Commonly though; the accepted usage is for “memory” to mean RAM or other solid-state on-chip or on-board storage, like caches, etc… while “storage” means something more off-line like a hard drive, flash drive, tape, stone tablets, etc…
The smart thing to do is to get some kind of redundant storage option- if you were to compress the music, you could probably store it for free on one of the online storage outfits.
There is a long term solution: Keep copying the data over to new media as they come out. This isn’t actually hard, as long as you know enough to do it. Yes, there was some data lost back in the '80s and '90s from people not doing this, but we’ve learned our lesson now, and that’s an easy mistake to avoid.
Yeah, I’m in a computer science and electrical engineering department and the battle has been lost there as well. You still hear well-understood terms like “too big to fit in memory”, but with the recent commonality of streaming data from disk, for simplicity we often just treat disk as a tier of memory that happens to be slower than RAM (which itself is slower than L3 cache which is slower than…).