|
|
Post by Priapulus on Nov 30, 2015 9:07:20 GMT -5
Today I found I was unable to access a hard drive directory, containing music files. Windows said the directory was corrupt and unreadable. Windows utilities were able to repair the drive, but the files are lost. I had weeks worth of work, ripping and organizing those files. Fortunately, I had a backup and could restore.
Hard drives are high speed, spinning disks and precision activators; they are easily damaged, and (like car tires) a consumable that will wear out and die. Hard drives are temporary. Hard drives have become so inexpensive, and so big, that there is no excuse for anyone not to have a backup.
Today, I'm going to buy a 6tb drive and make a 2nd backup, which I'll store at a friend's house (6tb will backup everything, except my movies). It's the cheapest insurance you'll ever get for your data, photos and music. Remember the three rules of computing:
1) Backup,
2) Backup,
3) Backup!
Sincerely
/blair
|
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Nov 30, 2015 9:17:40 GMT -5
Or stream Tidal and let the pros do it for you!
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator 
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,952
|
Post by hemster on Nov 30, 2015 11:32:20 GMT -5
It is prudent to keep multiple backups of any data you value. At least 3 backups and 1 offsite is the way to go IMHO. I don't trust the cloud. Providers can be hacked, can disappear, go bankrupt etc. Just read the small print when you sign up... they abdicate all responsibility for your content and hold themselves not liable. But you are 100% liable for your payments to them!  |
|
|
|
Post by vneal on Nov 30, 2015 12:29:30 GMT -5
I have at least two backups. Your EXTERNAL HARD DRIVE will fail someday
|
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Nov 30, 2015 12:35:16 GMT -5
I use 2 Ready NAS Duo network attached storage units, one ofnthem is mirrored and the other is not. That means my data is on 3 additional hard drives to the original.
Yes, fire would take me out, but at that point I have a lot more problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Nov 30, 2015 13:23:31 GMT -5
Yes, fire would take me out... So would an accidental "delete", deleting the wrong file or something like that; raid / mirroring is not a backup, it doesn't protect you from a power surge either. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,274
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 30, 2015 15:29:23 GMT -5
RAID arrays were designed to protect you from the catastrophic hardware failure of one or more hard drives... which they do pretty well. There are, however, several things that can go wrong that a RAID array will NOT protect you from: 1) As brubacca mentioned, a RAID array won't protect you from accidentally deleting or overwriting files. 2) It also won't protect you against deliberate deletion of files (by a virus or other malware). 3) And a RAID array won't protect you against something like a power surge that may fry all your drives - and.or the array controller itself. 4) A "RAID array" is basically several drives and a controller. If the RAID controller (the "box") fails, and you can't replace it, you may find yourself unable to read your data. (If you can't fix or replace your RAID array unit, you probably can't just plug your drives into a new one.) 5) The RAID array itself can fail, which can result in it deleting or garbling all the data on all your drives. A good backup will, however, protect you from all of these things. Another thing to consider is to use a checksum utility (like CDCheck) or a validation and repair utility like QuickPar..... A checksum utility works by processing a file, or a group of files or folders, to create a single unique checksum (number) that describes it. You can then use the same utility to process the same group of files at a later date. By confirming that the new checksum is identical to the original, you can then confirm that none of the files has changed. Instead of comparing a whole group of files against a backup; to test your files you simply run the checksum for those files, and compare it to a stored checksum. This process is much faster than comparing all the files to a full backup, and the math used makes it almost impossible for any file to be damaged without altering the checksum. By doing it this way, you can confirm that your current copy is still good by testing it directly, without having to get out your backups. You would typically create and store a checksum for each folder or album, right in the folder, and then issue a single command to "test folders against their checksums". (If the checksum utility reports a problem, you can then replace the files in the faulty folder with files from a backup copy.) A validation and repair utility stores extra information; you can then run it and it will both test each file, and repair any damaged files it finds, all automatically. The process is very similar to the one used by CDs to correct data bit errors automatically. The only downside is that the process of creating the repair information is extremely time consuming. (Therefore, it only makes sense for very important data.) Yes, fire would take me out... So would an accidental "delete", deleting the wrong file or something like that; raid / mirroring is not a backup, it doesn't protect you from a power surge either. |
|
|
|
Post by ÈlTwo on Nov 30, 2015 16:05:35 GMT -5
I like running an unRaid NAS as my backup.
|
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Nov 30, 2015 17:01:44 GMT -5
RAID arrays were designed to protect you from the catastrophic hardware failure of one or more hard drives... which they do pretty well. There are, however, several things that can go wrong that a RAID array will NOT protect you from: 1) As brubacca mentioned, a RAID array won't protect you from accidentally deleting or overwriting files. 2) It also won't protect you against deliberate deletion of files (by a virus or other malware). 3) And a RAID array won't protect you against something like a power surge that may fry all your drives - and.or the array controller itself. 4) A "RAID array" is basically several drives and a controller. If the RAID controller (the "box") fails, and you can't replace it, you may find yourself unable to read your data. (If you can't fix or replace your RAID array unit, you probably can't just plug your drives into a new one.) 5) The RAID array itself can fail, which can result in it deleting or garbling all the data on all your drives. A good backup will, however, protect you from all of these things. Another thing to consider is to use a checksum utility (like CDCheck) or a validation and repair utility like QuickPar..... A checksum utility works by processing a file, or a group of files or folders, to create a single unique checksum (number) that describes it. You can then use the same utility to process the same group of files at a later date. By confirming that the new checksum is identical to the original, you can then confirm that none of the files has changed. Instead of comparing a whole group of files against a backup; to test your files you simply run the checksum for those files, and compare it to a stored checksum. This process is much faster than comparing all the files to a full backup, and the math used makes it almost impossible for any file to be damaged without altering the checksum. By doing it this way, you can confirm that your current copy is still good by testing it directly, without having to get out your backups. You would typically create and store a checksum for each folder or album, right in the folder, and then issue a single command to "test folders against their checksums". (If the checksum utility reports a problem, you can then replace the files in the faulty folder with files from a backup copy.) A validation and repair utility stores extra information; you can then run it and it will both test each file, and repair any damaged files it finds, all automatically. The process is very similar to the one used by CDs to correct data bit errors automatically. The only downside is that the process of creating the repair information is extremely time consuming. (Therefore, it only makes sense for very important data.) I agree with that. But RAID is a little old fashioned these days anyway, ZFS is the new kid on the block with automatic check summing (guaranteed that data you put in is data you get out), compression (if desired), snapshots, deduplication, and has various mirroring / striping modes etc. Basically the best of RAID and then a bunch of extra / killer features built in. Pools can be increased in size by adding another drive while the system remains online, or even by replacing individual drives with bigger drives (again all online). No hardware needed, just a recent Free BSD or linux distro (and a decent amount of ram, the only real disadvantage; 4 gigs of ram is a good minimum). |
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Nov 30, 2015 17:19:57 GMT -5
What a horrid way to go about enjoying music.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Nov 30, 2015 17:33:31 GMT -5
What a horrid way to go about enjoying music. But don't you know, it's just SO much more convenient than CD's.  NOT. |
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Nov 30, 2015 17:41:23 GMT -5
What a horrid way to go about enjoying music. But don't you know, it's just SO much more convenient than CD's. NOT. Don't be so snarky; cd's can scratch, break, or get lost. My ZFS system guarantees the data will never go corrupt. Add offsite backups and it's a winner. There are other smaller advantages too; I rip my blurays / dvd's, and that process strips out the annoying FBI warnings and all that kind of crap. I can skip chapters at my pleasure etc. And the server in my house is used for other things (software development), not just media. |
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Nov 30, 2015 17:46:14 GMT -5
Just look at the preceding posts and think hard about this.
checksums to enjoy music? LOL!
|
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Nov 30, 2015 18:05:57 GMT -5
Just look at the preceding posts and think hard about this. checksums to enjoy music? LOL! Think hard about what? I don't worry about checksums, ZFS does that for me. It's just a filesystem that appears (to a user) like anyother filesystem attached to your computer. There are pros and cons to everything. After you've had a few discs go bad on you, maybe you won't try to pass all this off as nonsense. For that matter, there are many people who would view your audio equipment as ridiculous (tube monoblocks? Really? Just to listen to some rock / dance that is 95% distorted noise anyway?); give them an ipod with some headphones so they can hear the melody and they're good to go. |
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Nov 30, 2015 18:24:58 GMT -5
Bill, I'm having trouble figuring out what's sad here. Some people prefer cd's, some prefer nas, some prefer tubes, some prefer ipod + headphones, some prefer jazz, some prefer classical, some prefer to own and protect their purchase for many years to come, some don't give a crap when their originally perfect cd starts skipping in their cd-player after 10 months. If you can't look at your equipment list and realize that there is a large group of people who think you're nuts...
The point is, all of our stuff here satisfies desires or needs of different people, not everybody agrees on what is necessary to enjoy our media, but to go around thinking and posting that your list is the end-all / be-all is a little arrogant.
Edit: Bill has since deleted the post I was replying to here.
|
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Nov 30, 2015 19:22:20 GMT -5
I agree , I deleted my post in acknowledgment that if you want to spend your time worrying about redundant backups rather than enjoying music, I'm out.
Nothing in common n this case, nothing to add.
Rave on!
|
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Nov 30, 2015 20:11:59 GMT -5
I agree , I deleted my post in acknowledgment that if you want to spend your time worrying about redundant backups rather than enjoying music, I'm out. So "redundant backups" and "enjoying music" are mutually exclusive? I can't do both? One reason I enjoy my music is because the playback is not corrupted. I don't have to deal with skips or scratches on my cd's, I can skip previews on dvds where the playback is normally enforced on physical dvd players, and I can access the media quickly and conveniently wherever I am in my home. If the concept of redundant backups is too difficult or bothersome for you, perhaps you should be more careful when describing yourself as a "computer tech" in the post you since deleted. |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,100
|
Post by klinemj on Nov 30, 2015 21:07:07 GMT -5
I learned my lesson on HD failures a while back...and I had more than music stored. I lost data files including documents, spreadsheets, tax records, music, videos, and pictures. So...Tidal and the like do not solve all that. Love Tidal, but it is not a cure-all for the OP's issue.
The cure? Backup, backup, backup. I do now...
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Nov 30, 2015 21:21:28 GMT -5
I do get to enjoy the music, when i rip my CDs I rip to the following locations:
1- Local HArd Drive
2- Music Server Computer
3- ReadyNAS Duo #1 (which is mirrored with 2 drives
4- ReadyNAS Duo #2
So my music is on 5 hard drives on 4 different devices. (Actually i also copy everything to a large USB stick also)
So my ripping softwrae (dBPoweramp can do this) handles most the redundancy and I just enjoy music. I don't do or worry about playlists at the like.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,274
|
Post by KeithL on Dec 1, 2015 11:12:13 GMT -5
The "trick" about backups is NOT to worry about them..... just make it a habit. (I don't "worry" about keeping the gas tank on my car full either.) When you're ripping a batch of CDs, just plug in a PAIR of drives, and then copy each batch of RIPs to both - it may take a while longer to finish copying, but it isn't exactly a lot of work. Another alternative is to use a copy program; and, after you RIP a new batch of music to your main drive, tell it to copy only the new stuff to your backup drive. Lots of USB drives (like the WD ones) even come with a free backup program that will do it for you more or less automatically. There's a little bit of a learning curve while you decide what program to use and how to use it, but it really isn't much effort after that, and it sure beats ripping a thousand CDs all over again. Personally, I use a file manager program called Total Commander (which I highly recommend). I only have to hit three or four keys to tell it to copy an entire hard drive... and then one more button to tell it to skip copying the files that are already there. I guess whether you consider a little computer time "a huge burden" is a personal thing..... If I want to make a copy of my 1000 favorite albums to use in another room, I just plug in a $99 USB drive, hit a few buttons, and it's done when I come back in the morning. Try that with CDs. Even ignoring the cost, and keeping track of which one is in which box, do you know how many boxes it takes to hold 1000 CDs, or what they weigh? (I moved several years ago - 19 boxes of CDs - yikes.) With a USB drive, I can put 1000 CDs in my shirt pocket - and have room left over for some movies... I agree , I deleted my post in acknowledgment that if you want to spend your time worrying about redundant backups rather than enjoying music, I'm out. So "redundant backups" and "enjoying music" are mutually exclusive? I can't do both? One reason I enjoy my music is because the playback is not corrupted. I don't have to deal with skips or scratches on my cd's, I can skip previews on dvds where the playback is normally enforced on physical dvd players, and I can access the media quickly and conveniently wherever I am in my home. If the concept of redundant backups is too difficult or bothersome for you, perhaps you should be more careful when describing yourself as a "computer tech" in the post you since deleted. |
|
