Trying to start keeping backups

[tinpanalley]

I've got about 500GB of music, video I'd like to start backing up, I'd like to go with HDDs. I'm confused with how to create a chain of 2 additional HDDs that get backed up with content without wasting time sitting there copying over the stuff that's new. Can anyone enlighten me with some tried and tested processes?

 

[USAFRet]

I've got about 500GB of music, video I'd like to start backing up, I'd like to go with HDDs. I'm confused with how to create a chain of 2 additional HDDs that get backed up with content without wasting time sitting there copying over the stuff that's new. Can anyone enlighten me with some tried and tested processes?

For just files, like your music files, there are a couple of different methods.

SyncBack Free - give it source and target folders, give it a schedule, done.
This copies just the actual files from whatever folder you choose. Sees what is new, and copies it over.

or

Whole disk imaging. A couple of the recent clone/migration/imaging applications will do this on a schedule you set.
Casper and Macrium Reflect. Create an image of that whole drive, into a folder on the other drive. Does incremental, full, however you set it up.


Yes, I've used all 3.

 

[tinpanalley]

So this system has to keep all the HDDs on constantly? That's the part that concerns me, energywise.

 

[USAFRet]

So this system has to keep all the HDDs on constantly? That's the part that concerns me, energywise.

Well, it can't write to them if they are 'off'

Energywise, an HDD or two is just a few watts at idle. A dozen might equal one lightbulb.

You could have the drives spin down, and when accessed (written to) they should spin back up. I've had mixed results with this....the software tries to write, and by the time the drive spins up and reports ready, the software has given up, thinking it is a dead drive.

 

[USAFRet]

Energywise, at my local power price (2.244 ¢ per kWh), running a HDD at full capacity 24/7 ( maybe 9 watts), costs about $1.75/year.

 

[tinpanalley]

Well, it can't write to them if they are 'off'

Ok, so the energy isn't a problem. But I do wish there was a way I could not have it be mirroring all the time. It's just an annoyance with accidental deleting, malware, etc.

 

[USAFRet]

Well, it can't write to them if they are 'off'

Ok, so the energy isn't a problem. But I do wish there was a way I could not have it be mirroring all the time. It's just an annoyance with accidental deleting, malware, etc.

Ahh....this is what incrementals are for.
You have Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday etc
Simply go back to before the malware appeared.

Accidental deletion? SyncBackFree settings take this into account. Doesn't delete from the Target, unless you set it like that. It is not a true 'mirror', like a RAID 1 is.
Copies from source to target, and leaves things on the target. It tomorrow, it no longer exists on the source...it still exists on the target.

 

[tinpanalley]

Well, it can't write to them if they are 'off'

Ok, so the energy isn't a problem. But I do wish there was a way I could not have it be mirroring all the time. It's just an annoyance with accidental deleting, malware, etc.

Ahh....this is what incrementals are for.
You have Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday etc
Simply go back to before the malware appeared.

Accidental deletion? SyncBackFree settings take this into account. Doesn't delete from the Target, unless you set it like that. It is not a true 'mirror', like a RAID 1 is.
Copies from source to target, and leaves things on the target. It tomorrow, it no longer exists on the source...it still exists on the target.

So you'd recommend SyncBackFree for my backing up needs over other programs? I want to have my main media drive, one powered in my tower that will get updated once a month, and one offline that I'll plug into a dock and update at the same time.

 

[USAFRet]

Well, it can't write to them if they are 'off'

Ok, so the energy isn't a problem. But I do wish there was a way I could not have it be mirroring all the time. It's just an annoyance with accidental deleting, malware, etc.

Ahh....this is what incrementals are for.
You have Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday etc
Simply go back to before the malware appeared.

Accidental deletion? SyncBackFree settings take this into account. Doesn't delete from the Target, unless you set it like that. It is not a true 'mirror', like a RAID 1 is.
Copies from source to target, and leaves things on the target. It tomorrow, it no longer exists on the source...it still exists on the target.

So you'd recommend SyncBackFree for my backing up needs over other programs? I want to have my main media drive, one powered in my tower that will get updated once a month, and one offline that I'll plug into a dock and update at the same time.

If this drive has just files (media), yes. I find it a good solution.
It copies the actual files, just as they are. No special format or anything.
An mp3 original is the exact same mp3 on the backup copy.
You can take that drive and plug it into anything, and all your files are still there.

 

[USAFRet]

Another that does similar is FreeFileSync

Try them both. Both absolutely free.

 

[tinpanalley]

Another that does similar is FreeFileSync
Try them both. Both absolutely free.

With respect to HDDs. I've been thinking WD red or green. But I think I'll be creating a cycle system where I alternate which HDD I use daily. And if that's the case I don't want a green having worse load up times because of being more energy efficient.
Any thoughts on the WD20EZRX WD Green Caviar? The thing is that 2TB is more affordable for me than the WD20EFRX WD Red that I can also get here on Amazon France. Just trying to find the best I can for what I can afford, roughly 80-90€ each.

 

[USAFRet]

I have 2 x 3TB WD Greens, in two different PC's. They are ok for backup drives.

 

[tinpanalley]

You've been extremely helpful and I refuse to keep going any further as someone who owns and curates valuable digital media without adopting new backup procedures. That's it, I'm done being careless. A few years ago, I lost an entire 500GB of incredibly difficult to find music and music I had spent a LONG time capturing from LPs and 78s. In that moment, when I realised I had lost it all, the first thing I thought of was the time tagging everything. The music, in some way or another was recuperable, slowly. But the time tagging was something I'd never get back.

Therefore, in light of my new best practices, let me just ask you one last thing, just to see if I'm getting this backing up methodology down... I'm thinking of doing the following, 3 HDDs:
Main drive in the computer - A
Second drive in another bay, powered, connected - B
Third drive, offline, not in computer at all - C

I don't write to A enough to warrant daily updates/backups, but I'd say twice a month couldn't hurt. Plus, if any particular week I get tons of tagging done, then it would prompt an in-between back up just to update all that work. (with discographies, this can get heavy)

Then (I got this from someone else) every few months, rotate which one is the A, the B, and the C (I think the idea is that then no drive ever sits for too long without being powered, but to me I wonder if that's even an issue with hard drives). Let's assume they do get rotated, I'm thinking these should all be HDDs that CAN be used as daily work drives (listening to music, watching videos from them). Because if A craps out one day, B should be able to go into its place and be a drive that can be read from regularly and not have any head parking or any other such feature that makes it only useful as a storage drive. No? Side question... typically, unless I'm wrong, electronic devices don't like being powered on from an off state. How does constantly re-waking a HDD affect it long-term?

How is all of that for a system? (..I'm trying, go easy on me...)

 

[USAFRet]

Yes, that would work.
Another good way is 2 externals. One at home, one at work. Rotate weekly.

A - main music drive
B - internal backup
C & D - externals
Sunday eve, backup all to the C external. Disconnect, and connect the D external.
Monday morn, take the C to work
Friday afternoon, bring the C home
Sunday, backup any changes to the C & D. Take the D to work
Wash, rinse, repeat.

So you always have a semi-recent backup offsite. This alleviates any issue with theft, lightning, etc, etc.


And yes. In the unlikely event of drive A dying, take it out and designate B with that same drive letter. Poof...all works exactly as it did. When you get around to it, replace that dead A (which will become the new B).

Don't worry about the parking/unparking. Drives do that ALL the time.

 

[tinpanalley]

Yes, that would work.
Another good way is 2 externals. One at home, one at work. Rotate weekly.

Only problem... I don't "go" to work. So I have to just keep this at home.

And yes. In the unlikely event of drive A dying, take it out and designate B with that same drive letter. Poof...all works exactly as it did. When you get around to it, replace that dead A (which will become the new B). Don't worry about the parking/unparking. Drives do that ALL the time.

And therefore, it doesn't really matter whether I have more "storage" drives or more "regular" drives?
I'm looking at these, just in case you have any opinions...(sorry that the links are from Amazon France)
WD Green
WD Red
Toshiba
Obviously, I like the Green for the price.

 

[USAFRet]

The WD Green is fine for this use. I have 2...

 

[tinpanalley]

I've been exploring a bunch of different backup programs. I like the simplicity of the free ones listed here (don't know if you're still around, @USAFRet). I was talking to someone over on another forum and they were telling me that unless I'm using an image-type backup then I'm wasting space and potentially running into lost data/bad copies. But imaging seems SO much more complicated than what I need. I'm not backing up entire mainframes or even a home computer. My HDD is 2TB because that's more than I need and I need it be a direct mirror of what's on my main media drive. But I WOULD like it if I could replug the backup in in a month and say, "ok, do a quick scan and just update what's different" Is that possible with the kind of backup programs you're telling me about?

 

[USAFRet]

I've been exploring a bunch of different backup programs. I like the simplicity of the free ones listed here (don't know if you're still around, @USAFRet). I was talking to someone over on another forum and they were telling me that unless I'm using an image-type backup then I'm wasting space and potentially running into lost data/bad copies. But imaging seems SO much more complicated than what I need. I'm not backing up entire mainframes or even a home computer. My HDD is 2TB because that's more than I need and I need it be a direct mirror of what's on my main media drive. But I WOULD like it if I could replug the backup in in a month and say, "ok, do a quick scan and just update what's different" Is that possible with the kind of backup programs you're telling me about?

Yes, still here.
But if you're only doing it once a month, you probably want to do a Full image. Doesn't really take any more time to set up, or actually do it.
My system does a Full image of the C drive every night at 2AM. All unattended.

 

[tinpanalley]

Yes, still here.
But if you're only doing it once a month, you probably want to do a Full image. Doesn't really take any more time to set up, or actually do it.
My system does a Full image of the C drive every night at 2AM. All unattended.

Hmm... ok. Questions:
1. Can I do an image of just the folders I want to back up?
2. Which program do you use
3. Why is an image better than mirrored files like SyncBackFree does? I have to be able to pop in and grab literally ONE song file if I need to.

 

[USAFRet]

Yes, still here.
But if you're only doing it once a month, you probably want to do a Full image. Doesn't really take any more time to set up, or actually do it.
My system does a Full image of the C drive every night at 2AM. All unattended.

Hmm... ok. Questions:
1. Can I do an image of just the folders I want to back up?
2. Which program do you use
3. Why is an image better than mirrored files like SyncBackFree does? I have to be able to pop in and grab literally ONE song file if I need to.

OK, this is two completely different things.

1. Drive image - This is an image of the whole drive. And no, you can't retrieve just one file out of it.
I use Macrium Reflect for this.
Runs unattended.

2. File and folder backups - This is, as you might guess, just a regular copy of whatever folders you desgnate.
SyncBackFree does this. Again, on a schedule you set up.
This is just a regular compare and copy function.
It looks at the source and target folders, compares, and anything new or changed in the Source gets copied over tot he Target.
Just regular files that you can access at any time.

 

[tinpanalley]

OK, this is two completely different things.

1. Drive image - This is an image of the whole drive. And no, you can't retrieve just one file out of it.
I use Macrium Reflect for this.
Runs unattended.

2. File and folder backups - This is, as you might guess, just a regular copy of whatever folders you desgnate.
SyncBackFree does this. Again, on a schedule you set up.
This is just a regular compare and copy function.
It looks at the source and target folders, compares, and anything new or changed in the Source gets copied over tot he Target.
Just regular files that you can access at any time.

So there is no actual value of one over the other, only personal preference and what's best suited to your needs? They're both technically the same?

 

[USAFRet]

OK, this is two completely different things.

1. Drive image - This is an image of the whole drive. And no, you can't retrieve just one file out of it.
I use Macrium Reflect for this.
Runs unattended.

2. File and folder backups - This is, as you might guess, just a regular copy of whatever folders you desgnate.
SyncBackFree does this. Again, on a schedule you set up.
This is just a regular compare and copy function.
It looks at the source and target folders, compares, and anything new or changed in the Source gets copied over tot he Target.
Just regular files that you can access at any time.

So there is no actual value of one over the other, only personal preference and what's best suited to your needs? They're both technically the same?

No, they're not the same.
The Macrium image is good for a full restoration of that drive.
The SyncBack is good for specific files and folders.

In my system, the C drive is the OS and applications. Full image with Macrium.
Other drives hold other things. Photo, video, etc, etc. Not ALL of those I want backed up all the time. For instance, I don't need all 6 versions of a photo I'm working on. Maybe just the original, and the finished product. So the folders with those 2 things gets backed up. Not the working folder with all the in between stuff.

So the SyncBack is good for those.

 

[tinpanalley]

No, they're not the same.
The Macrium image is good for a full restoration of that drive.
The SyncBack is good for specific files and folders.

In my system, the C drive is the OS and applications. Full image with Macrium.
Other drives hold other things. Photo, video, etc, etc. Not ALL of those I want backed up all the time. For instance, I don't need all 6 versions of a photo I'm working on. Maybe just the original, and the finished product. So the folders with those 2 things gets backed up. Not the working folder with all the in between stuff.

So the SyncBack is good for those.

Right, ok. So I've got 780GB of music and photos (originals and compressed edits) that I just don't want to lose. I'll edit metadata on both every now and then and I'll want my backups to reflect recent acquisitions and tagging. So, for me, probably SyncBack is enough. Because yes, as I said, they are just backups but I feel like at some point, I'm going to want to pop in and take one album. ...or maybe not... I don't know anymore. Maybe I should just try Macrium. In the end, I'm never gonna WORK from the backups. I just need them to be easily retrievable and I'm FRIGHTENED of using a program that then disappears or becomes pay only.

 

[USAFRet]

With Macrium, you get a file like this:
F252147D039FECEB-00-00.mrimg 91+GB. The entirety of my C drive. You can't retrieve an individual file out of it.

With SyncBack, you get regular files and folders, easily accessible.

 

[tinpanalley]

With Macrium, you get a file like this:
F252147D039FECEB-00-00.mrimg 91+GB. The entirety of my C drive. You can't retrieve an individual file out of it. With SyncBack, you get regular files and folders, easily accessible.

Ok, cool, thanks for all your explanations. Really appreciate it. I just wanted to be sure there wasn't something more secure, or more error-free. But if they're both the same, then great. I'll read both of their website info and pick one.