• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

Before I start re-ripping my music - some advice please...

p9ul

Distinguished Member
After reading a few threads I've decided to re-rip my music collection as I haven't been satisfied with the audio quality obtained from iTunes.

So, I downloaded EAC & dbpoweramp and did a couple of test rips to see if there was any noticable difference - on the whole yes. My original files were at 320AAC and the new files ripped using EAC to WAV then dbpoweramp to convert to MP3 LAME seemed clearer with less hiss compared to my original versions - so I'm taking the plunge, but before I go too far...

1) is the default WAV format in EAC the best option? Any other options I should look out for? I'm not concerned about how fast the ripping is done - only that the finished result is as good as it can be.

2) will MP3 LAME be fine with my 5.5G iPod? (what about this Frauhoffer thingumyjig :confused:) I'm thinking MP3 might be best for compatibility reasons but would AAC be a better choice?

3) Is there a good/easy way to replace the new files with existing within iTunes? and what about editing ID3 tags?

I know a lot of this stuff is touched on within the FAQ's but I found it hard to see a defintive answer specific to my needs.

I'm sure the answers will generate more questions so please bear with me. having lossless would have been favourable but I don't have the storage space and I'm planning on getting a 3G iPhone when they appear... the majority of my music listening is done through the iPod in the car / headphones or through the computer from iTunes.

thanks in advance
 

PJTX100

Distinguished Member
EAC will happily convert to MP3 directly, using the same LAME encoder as DBPoweramp hence no sound quality difference.

MP3 LAME is fine on an iPod, LAME is generally regarded as superior to Fraunhofer on 128K bitratres & above.
 

amcluesent

Distinguished Member
IMHO, use EAC to rip to FLAC and mp3tag to update the tags as necessary. Then you'll have a lossloss archive and never need to rip again.

Use something foobar2000 to bulk convert to LAME MP3 for your iPod.

(N.B AAC 320kbps should be very good, surprised that you find MP3 superior...)
 

ukflyboy

Standard Member
I rip all my music using EAC and then encode using (Razor)Lame and am very happy with the results. I stuck with MP3 as it is universally accepted so I should never have to re-rip (though I keep copies of the WAV files on external HDD just in case). I record using the Lame presets (always recommended) in -V1 which gives me a file size of around 5-6Mb per song. Probably a bit overkill but better to be on the safe side.
Lame is regarded by most as the best MP3 encoder there is, but I refuse to be drawn into an argument on the best codecs!!! Any other questions I have found www.hydrogenaudio.org to be a fabulous resource.
 

p9ul

Distinguished Member
IMHO, use EAC to rip to FLAC and mp3tag to update the tags as necessary. Then you'll have a lossloss archive and never need to rip again.

Use something foobar2000 to bulk convert to LAME MP3 for your iPod.

(N.B AAC 320kbps should be very good, surprised that you find MP3 superior...)

didn't say I found MP3 superior over AAC, although it does seem a more "universal" format. Main reason I'm wanting to re-rip is that I'm convinced iTunes isn't very good at doing it. What was making me think that was when listening to the iPod, everything I've ripped myself was at 320AAC, yet some music I've (cough) dowloaded (cough) sounds much better even though its "only" 128 MP3. Which is best was an answer I was hoping to get but I think it could be a bit subjective...

I'd love to go with something like FLAC but I simply don't have the capacity for it - to be honest, if I ever decide to change format again, it won't bother me re-ripping again, this is probably "music collection rip" No. 5 as it is!!:suicide: :D although none of the previous labours was on this scale.

My music collection isn't huge as it is - I don't tend to rip the tracks I don't want and keep entire albums digitally just for the sake of it - I've got a fair few albums but I'll tend to only like 4 or 5 tracks from each - current iTunes tracks number about 1,800 (about 12gb). This is mainly for space reasons but also so I'm not constantly skipping tracks on the iPod when a "crap" one comes up... (I use shuffle songs mostly). I did experiemnt using Apple Lossless last year - I re-ripped about 300 tracks before going on holiday but I couldn't make out any noticable improvement - not enough to warrant the additonal file size.

thanks for the recommendation of mp3tag - will look that one up.
 

[email protected]

Active Member
By ripping to FLAC you will use less space than WAV as it is a compressed format and can be restored to original.

You can then encode to AAC, MP3 or any of the other options. If you like MP3, I'd try a variable bitrate (Lame V0) which gives very good quality and saves space on your iPod - not many people can tell the difference between ~250vbr and 320 straight out of an MP3 player.
 

Autopilot

Distinguished Member
Archive your CD's with as lossless codec like FLAC and you will never have to go those this time consuming process again. Then make MP3's, AAC's at you leisure from the FLAC's - or let DBpowerAMP do it while you are at the pub ;)
 

p9ul

Distinguished Member
I think I'm convinced enough to go and get that external HDD I've been meaning to get.

With regards to FLAC - can all these network AV amps deal with it?
 

Autopilot

Distinguished Member
I think I'm convinced enough to go and get that external HDD I've been meaning to get.

With regards to FLAC - can all these network AV amps deal with it?

If you mean network streamers (Sono's, Squeezebox etc), yes most do FLAC (at least the ones worth buying anyway). FLAC is the most widely supported lossless codec. But if you end up with one that does not (i.e. Apple), it no big deal - just convert to the lossless format it supports with zero loss of audio quality. Thats (one of) the beauty of lossless.
 

p9ul

Distinguished Member
I was thinking of a new AV amp, poss Onkyo, Yamaha or Sony...
 

The latest video from AVForums

Fidelity in Motion's David Mackenzie talks about his work on disc encoding & the future of Blu-ray
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom