Best Software to Rip WAV files?
Posted by: HuwJ on 30 December 2009
I've always used EAC to rip FLAC's and WAV files. Since I upgraded to Windows 7 (64) EAC has become flakey and locks the whole system up about every third track.
I've been using Winamp to rip over the last week and it shoots along. However the older EAC ripped music seems to be of a better quality than those ripped in Winamp. This could be my imagination but EAD had all sorts of error checking etc and I can't find anything like that in Winamp.
Can anyone suggest a good quality WAV & FLAC ripper to replace EAC on Windows 7 (64)? Happy to buy one so not just looking for free software.
Regards,
Huw
I've been using Winamp to rip over the last week and it shoots along. However the older EAC ripped music seems to be of a better quality than those ripped in Winamp. This could be my imagination but EAD had all sorts of error checking etc and I can't find anything like that in Winamp.
Can anyone suggest a good quality WAV & FLAC ripper to replace EAC on Windows 7 (64)? Happy to buy one so not just looking for free software.
Regards,
Huw
Seems a bit off to me also. There's always 24/96 downloads. 
Keith,
all CDPs can play them, just like most can decode pre-emphasis. It is a part of the reb book spec after all.
iTunes unfortunately does not see the pre gap tracks/info. It is an issue with how Disk Utility works.
I would guess they would play on the drive of your Mac, but iTunes cannot rip them, thats all.
XLD will though
On the other hand iTunes does de-emphasize on the fly when ripping.
Go figure.
all CDPs can play them, just like most can decode pre-emphasis. It is a part of the reb book spec after all.
iTunes unfortunately does not see the pre gap tracks/info. It is an issue with how Disk Utility works.
I would guess they would play on the drive of your Mac, but iTunes cannot rip them, thats all.
XLD will though
On the other hand iTunes does de-emphasize on the fly when ripping.
Go figure.
If someone wants to try, you can pull a track off an HDX via network sharing. It's always been accessable. Have a few converted and on my portable right now.
My guess is that the offset matters as I do hear a dif but perhaps it's something else though I couldn't imagine what. Wouldn't be the first time I've lacked the knowledge to fully understand something. I do try not to think everthing is always as it appears regardless of how often that is the case.
My guess is that the offset matters as I do hear a dif but perhaps it's something else though I couldn't imagine what. Wouldn't be the first time I've lacked the knowledge to fully understand something. I do try not to think everthing is always as it appears regardless of how often that is the case.
If it turns out that the HDX cannot rip hidden tracks does this mean the HDX and iTunes are not suitable rippers for the pedantic users?
Is it that gapless and pregap are not the same thing? From what I can make out, the former is important for uninterrupted replay, commonly found on classical passages, and the latter is for Patrick.
Is it that gapless and pregap are not the same thing? From what I can make out, the former is important for uninterrupted replay, commonly found on classical passages, and the latter is for Patrick.
quote:Originally posted by js:
If someone wants to try, you can pull a track off an HDX via network sharing. It's always been accessable. Have a few converted and on my portable right now.
My guess is that the offset matters as I do hear a dif but perhaps it's something else though I couldn't imagine what. Wouldn't be the first time I've lacked the knowledge to fully understand something. I do try not to think everthing is always as it appears regardless of how often that is the case.
js, you could rip on the HDX exactly the same track that PMR used Move it somewhere accessible and use dBPoweramp to calculate the checksum. Then we'd have the whole story.
When you say that offset matters and you hear a dif, this implies to me that a rip to WAV made on two different pcs sounds different to you. Is this what you mean? My understanding is that drive offset can cause a few samples to be missed at the start of a track - a fraction of a microsecond's worth of probably silence. Apart from that, PMRs tests here show that the substance of rips from all these rippers is the same.
quote:Originally posted by likesmusic:
My understanding is that drive offset can cause a few samples to be missed at the start of a track - a fraction of a microsecond's worth of probably silence.
Correct, even drives with the largest offsets (say +1000 samples) this is still a tiny fragment of audio, either at the start or end of the track. Offsets do not effect the overall quality of the audio.
Why are offsets are corrected? (I have seen posts suggesting it might be a conspiracy
), so that rips from different drives can be cross-compared and give identical files, whereas a rip on iTunes on one drive will be different to another drive with a different offset.quote:Originally posted by mrspoon:quote:Originally posted by likesmusic:
My understanding is that drive offset can cause a few samples to be missed at the start of a track - a fraction of a microsecond's worth of probably silence.
Correct, even drives with the largest offsets (say +1000 samples) this is still a tiny fragment of audio, either at the start or end of the track. Offsets do not effect the overall quality of the audio.
Why are offsets are corrected? (I have seen posts suggesting it might be a conspiracy
mrspoon - thank you. On the off-chance that you might know what your are talking about (and if you are who i think you are you should do!) could you tell me
1) are the samples missed due to drive offset silence, or can they be music?
2) in the case of a classical opera cd, which might have 40 'tracks' but actually be continuous music, are samples missed for each 'track'?
Beats me. I didn't speak in absolutes. I'm just aware of differences I've heard. I'm not that into doing this comparison as I'm not sure we're comparing everything but wanted to give a heads up on how to get an HDX file for those that may. I'm not saying that your not comparing everything like this either as a can't imagine what else would be important but then again, I've been surprised before.quote:Originally posted by likesmusic:quote:Originally posted by js:
If someone wants to try, you can pull a track off an HDX via network sharing. It's always been accessable. Have a few converted and on my portable right now.
My guess is that the offset matters as I do hear a dif but perhaps it's something else though I couldn't imagine what. Wouldn't be the first time I've lacked the knowledge to fully understand something. I do try not to think everthing is always as it appears regardless of how often that is the case.
js, you could rip on the HDX exactly the same track that PMR used Move it somewhere accessible and use dBPoweramp to calculate the checksum. Then we'd have the whole story.
When you say that offset matters and you hear a dif, this implies to me that a rip to WAV made on two different pcs sounds different to you. Is this what you mean? My understanding is that drive offset can cause a few samples to be missed at the start of a track - a fraction of a microsecond's worth of probably silence. Apart from that, PMRs tests here show that the substance of rips from all these rippers is the same.
I do suspect differences vary by PC. My personal drive has a huge offset and maybe that's why it's so apparent but if that's the case, I would think any would be undesirable on an absolute scale. Of course I've also heard difs on other PCs with less offset correction but never compared one to another. Until I here a non offset drive that sounds as good, I don't see a need to compare which is worse. That PMR only has an 8 offset may have something to do with his results. We may actually all agree given the same dem. Who knows. 
mrspoon - thank you for explaining that. And thank you for dBpoweramp too.