There is a bit of a learning curve with Eac and I've never been willing to
put the time into it. I rip to 320 kbps using Real player and Express Rip
from NCH and am very happy with the results. Express Rip is sometimes a bit
clunky especially in the looking up of track info.
Supporters of EAC say you get a very clean copy, but my aging ears aren't
sharp enough to notice the difference for the most part.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brett Boyer" <bboyer...@gmail.com>
To: "PC Audio Discussion List" <pc-audio@pc-audio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 2:28 AM
Subject: Re: ripping my collection: advantages of eAC vs mainstream rippers
Thanks for the advice. I guess insane is a strong word. I'd like to
preserve the music but I don't think I will do flak. Still wondering if
ripping to mp3 320k is it worth using eAC? anyway.
thanks again
bb
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Chaltain" <chalt...@gmail.com>
To: "PC Audio Discussion List" <pc-audio@pc-audio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 12:15 AM
Subject: Re: ripping my collection: advantages of eAC vs mainstream
rippers
I rip to MP3, and I use something less than a 320K bit rate, so I don't
think you're insane, but it depends on what you'll be doing with these
ripped files. For my part, I'm not an audiophile and I'm not going to be
playing these on a high fidelity system, so I make some allowances for
speed and convenience.
If I had the ears that I had when I was younger, and I had the time and
the space, then I'd be considering EAC and FLAC myself.
IMHO, you're not insane for going with what makes sense for your
situation.
On 20/02/12 18:53, Brett Boyer wrote:
Ok I don't think I have the space for flak files. I was hoping mp3 at
320k to conserve space. So would eAC still be a good choice? Or am I
insane for ripping to mp3s. and I should just wait untill I can get some
more space.
bb
----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Crawford (GI4OPH)"
<tj.crawf...@talktalk.net>
To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'" <pc-audio@pc-audio.org>
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 4:22 PM
Subject: RE: ripping my collection: advantages of eAC vs mainstream
rippers
Hi Brett,
I used exact audio copy to rip my cd collection, comprising around 1000
discs to flac. To date I haven't encountered any tracks with audible
artefacts, even those which eac reported as having possible errors.
Eac seems to be generally regarded as the most accurate ripping tool
around.
By utilising both secure mode, and the accurate rip facility, I reckon
you
can be pretty sure if eac reports no errors you have a perfect copy.
The process of ripping even a collection of a few hundred discs can be
time
consuming, so it pays to get it right first time.
With this in mind, I personally feel it's well worth taking the time to
learn and configure exact audio copy.
Cheers,
Tim.
-----Original Message-----
From: pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org
[mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org]
On Behalf Of Brett Boyer
Sent: 20 February 2012 18:19
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: ripping my collection: advantages of eAC vs mainstream rippers
Hi. I've been reading on list about eAC for ripping cd's and I know
a
few people on here swear by it. Was just curious about some of the
advantages using it. I'm thinking of ripping my whole cd collection and
throwing it all out. Is eAC a program I should consider? I've used wmp
and
Itunes but I hear some people r unhappy with the results.
thanks in advance for the help.
bb
Brett Boyer
--
Christopher (CJ)
chalt...@gmail.com
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org
