CD ripping.

DrMartin

DrMartin

Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
Location
Isle of Wight
Ok, I'm having another go at this after my rather confused attempts earlier in the year trying to get to grips with FLACs and EAC etc. - I gave up due to what I'll call 'library issues'.

Anyway, I'm having another go and starting from scratch. I have decided not to bother with compressed file formats and to use .WAV files because my understanding is that these are totally uncompressed - is that the case? What I'd also like to know is whether it matters - in terms of quality - which software one uses to rip to .WAV? In other words, is a .WAV file a .WAV file regardless of how it was produced?

I've got something on my PC called "Power to go" and it rips to .WAV and creates easily found folders with all the info I need and is dead easy and quick to use but I don't want to start ripping all my CDs if I'm going to lose out on quality by using this software?

I'm not getting into decent playback yet, that's a whole otherminefield, just at the ripping stage for now.
 
I have used EAC and dbpoweramp , I cannot hear any difference between the two. I like the latter as it tends to rip a bit quicker than EAC.
WAV files are totally uncompressed.
 
The only real issue with wav files is that there is no standard way to embed meta data.

If you rip to flac with dbPoweramp set to its defaults it will both create a logical file/file name structure for you and directly embed tags describing the file, including cover art. It works really well. The result is immediately compatible with Squeeze and Foobar (for example).

There are then standard tools to transcode, so in the future you could generate MP3s or wavs or any of the Apple options. dbPoweramp contains a pretty comprehensive batch converter.

IMO if you start with wavs you're throwing away context and information you may want in the future and that can only be collected when the CD is in the drive. The one thing to avoid is doing the ripping more than once.

And for the record a viable alternative may be iTunes using a lossless format. I don't know if you can take the results and import it into an alternative server. An expert needs to comment on that.

Paul
 
A few years ago I bought a SB+ and used EAC to rip some 700 discs to wav.
It took an eternity and I couldn't get on with the little display on the player or the menu system. I wasn't aware of the tagging issues with wav at the time, so when I discovered what needed doing to fix the problem I gave up, scrapped the lot and went Apple.

Insert disc, set import to apple lossless, switch on the error correction feature and let it fly. I suppose it got 90-95% of discs perfectly tagged and with the correct artwork.
Never tried playing the iTunes library on something else.

One thing I'd recommend for a large CD collection is a decent external cd/dvd drive.
Spend a few bob on something like an external Plextor, especially if using a Laptop as you'll probably shag the internal drive.
The collection has now grown to around 1200 albums - some rips and some downloads and i'd never now go back to discs.
 
IMO if you start with wavs you're throwing away context and information you may want in the future and that can only be collected when the CD is in the drive. The one thing to avoid is doing the ripping more than once.
Click to expand...

What sort of information are you referring to?

Perhaps because I listen almost exclusively to classical music, tags seem irrelevant.
 
Basil said:
Perhaps because I listen almost exclusively to classical music, tags seem irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why tags seem irrelevant to classical music ?

I like classical and popular music 1925-1959 and am always very interested in knowing the performers, music title, date of performance, location, and lots of other details including associated pictures etc.

I can't see how this info doesn't apply to classical music ?

JC.
 
I use Flac as it is compatable with all modern players, wouldnt use my mac like Rob does as the library files can currupt and itunes is shight, stick to what u can use universally and get rid of those silver frizbies and relax and listen to ur music without the hassle of having to leave the sofa :)
 
jcbrum said:
I don't understand why tags seem irrelevant to classical music ?

I like classical and popular music 1925-1959 and am always very interested in knowing the performers, music title, date of performance, location, and lots of other details including associated pictures etc.

I can't see how this info doesn't apply to classical music ?

JC.
Click to expand...

I think it might be useful to consider that different people want their computers to do different things for them.

Two of those things:

What I assume JC has in mind in this post: the computer is a comprehensive interface between the listener and the library, providing all the information he wants alongside sending the music out to the playback system.

On the other side what I assume Basil wants: a database to pick from and then play (and forget about the hardware).

This second version is also where I am at the moment. Rip to WAV, put all of that in a folder, name the folder with pretty much what would have been on the CD spine. The computer mirrors what was on the shelf - an alphabetical list by composer for classical or by artist for everything else.

I can find what I want and play it.

When I want more information or pictures I'll get out the CD booklet, and for the time being I'd rather sit and look through that than sit with a laptop. What I'm intending doing is filing the booklets on a shelf in place of the CDs - something I already did with opera librettos as I found it easier to have them all together anyway.

This changes once you get into downloads, but that's another issue.
 
It seems to me that if you're going to bother putting your CD's onto a computer, you would get the most benefit from a co-hesive library, such as iTunes, and you might as well use the tag facilities rather than ignore them.

:)

Just my 2p. ymmv.

JC.
 
On the other side what I assume Basil wants: a database to pick from and then play (and forget about the hardware).
Click to expand...

That's pretty much spot-on Coda II.

The reason I decided to shift to a PC based source, was to take advantage of the (almost) infinite playing times.
 
What sort of information are you referring to?
Click to expand...
Conductor, composer, performer, opus, date etc.

For an off the cuff example if I search for 'Bernstein' I get the Beethoven symphonies, West Side Story and a track from a Dave Brubeck collection I didn't know I had. I'm sure we could come up with better examples.

If you rely on file names and directory structure you have to decide (for example) whether you give the composer or the conductor priority. A database can provide whichever view suits at the moment. A database built from embedded tags can be recreated at any time as long as you look after the files.

So, IMO, it's worth thinking about before committing to ripping.

Paul
 
Paul Ranson said:
Conductor, composer, performer, opus, date etc.

For an off the cuff example if I search for 'Bernstein' I get the Beethoven symphonies, West Side Story and a track from a Dave Brubeck collection I didn't know I had. I'm sure we could come up with better examples.

If you rely on file names and directory structure you have to decide (for example) whether you give the composer or the conductor priority. A database can provide whichever view suits at the moment. A database built from embedded tags can be recreated at any time as long as you look after the files.

So, IMO, it's worth thinking about before committing to ripping.

Paul
Click to expand...

freedb - the one that EAC uses - gives title, artist, year and genre.

Is the other information that you mention available elsewhere?
 
And if I load the cue sheet for a CD into Foobar it pulls up the tags all over again, I would guess dbpoweramp does the same.

That being the case, whether the CD is in the drawer or not doesn't matter, the information required to pull up meta data is still there in the cue sheet if I should want to do so in the future.

[that's how I understand it - may well be wrong of course]
 
Thanks for all your replies to this. At first I was a bit overwhelmed by all the jargon that you experienced guys use and take for granted: remember, I am a total newcomer to all of this.

Anyway, having read through your replies, and had a little play around with Windows Media Player, I can now appreciate what you are all saying and it is now apparent to me that the software one uses to rip & compile a database is just as important a consideration as the file format.

Ripping to .WAV using Windows Media Player means I have to search for the 'meta-data' to add it to the library. That's ok because so far WMP has found everything quite quickly - even on some import CDs I tried just to be difficult ;) but I can see why it would be nicer to have the whole process done for you in one go.

I also tried a compilation CD to see how WMP dealt with that it and it's all quite straight forward.

The search function in WMP seems very good as well - I can search by as many terms as I'll ever need.

So, as things stand, I'm leaning towards sticking with this system.

I did try Media Monkey and db power amp a few months back but I got into all sorts of problems and could not understand the file and folder structures. they seemed to be creating all sorts of duplicate folders all over the place and I got into a right mess so not sure whether to go back to those and try again ...


I did go out and buy a 3 metre USB A-B today which will allow me to connect this PC to my Cambridge DAC - so looking forward to giving it all a try out later.

Only problem is I'll have to drag the PC upstairs to do it - until I can think of a more permanent solution - like buying another PC which will bcome a dedicated juke box :)

Anyway, thanks again for all the replies.




Martin
 

Latest posts

Back
Top