adamslim;175363 Wrote: > There is much more likely to be a difference in EAC vs iTunes than ALAC > vs FLAC. Lossless is lossless, and it seems highly dubious to me to > suggest that the SB3 will decode one better sonically than the other. > > However, EAC will make a difference. iTunes will take the first rip it > gets, and will use error correction (i.e. guessing) if there is a > problem; EAC will make sure that the rip is correct by rereading dozens > of times, if necessary. (This is simplified, but close enough) > > The audibility of this depends on your system and your CDs. CD error > correction is rather good, so there may be little or no problems on 99% > of your CDs. But can you be sure? > > You can also use AccurateRip, which compares the rip with others'. If > yours matches anyone else's, it's basically certain that you're fine. > However, this does not work with iTunes (AFAIK). > > I take the view that I only ever want to rip once, and only buy about > 10-20 CDs a month, so I use EAC and AccurateRip. The 10 minutes it > takes to rip allows me to read the sleeve :) > > You could try to find a CD that fails at AccurateRip and compare EAC vs > iTunes, but I certainly can't be bothered with that - I'd rather just > get it right first time. > > Adam
In the test that I did, I started with alac generated by itunes and flac generated by eac. Then I used dbpoweramp to transcode the alac back to flac. Differences will happen, but I would guess not all that often. -- totoro squeezebox 3 -> mccormack dna .5 -> audio physic tempo 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ totoro's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5935 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32212 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
