More > JRiver Media Center 22 for Windows

JRiver vs. dBpoweramp for ripping CDs? Opinions?

<< < (4/9) > >>

mwillems:
Per Jim's request above, I did some quick tests.  I didn't have time to rip ten or twenty CDs tonight, but I ripped three and the results are pretty representative of what I've been seeing.  Both players were set to rip as fast as possible to FLAC with the same compression level.  Tests were done using the same drive, on the same computer.  I evaluated metadata based on the seven fields most important to me (Album Art, Album Name, Artist Name, Track Titles, Date, Genre, Ratings).  Neither player reported any errors on any discs.

------------------------------------------------------
Disc #1 - Russian Circles - Guidance - 7 tracks

JRiver:
Time to Rip: 4:15
Metadata:
Partially Present
Present: Album Art, Album Name, Artist Name, and Track Titles were present and correct.
Missing: Date, Genre and Ratings Were Absent

dBpoweramp:
Time to Rip: 1:38
Metadata:
All 7 Fields present and correct

Disc #2 - RR7349 - S U R V I V E - 9 tracks

JRiver:
Time to Rip: 1:50
Metadata:
Partially Present
Present: Artist Name and Track Titles were present and correct
Partial: Album Name was present but incorrect.
Missing: Album Art, Date, Genre, and Ratings Were Absent

dBpoweramp:
Time to Rip: 1:45
Metadata:
All 7 Fields present and correct

Disc #3 Ne Obliviscaris - Citadel - 6 tracks

JRiver:
Time to Rip: 2:01
Metadata:
Partially Present
Present: Album Art, Album Name, Artist Name were present and correct
Partial: Track Titles were partially missing.
Missing: Date, Genre, and Ratings Were Absent

dBpoweramp:
Time to Rip: 1:10
Metadata:
All 7 Fields present and correct
----------------------------------------------------

As noted it's a small sample size, and the middle result suggests the speed advantage isn't a certainty.  If there's interest I can add some more another day, but I'm out of time (and new CDs!) tonight.

JimH:
4 minutes to rip a CD doesn't seem right.  Could you double check your settings? 

"Same compression level"... did you change MC's defaults?

Thanks for the data.

JimH:
Why would you want "Ratings"?  I don't think I'd want "Genre" either.

mark_h:
MC rips CDs?!

Just kidding.

I use dBpoweramp, after moving from EAC some years ago, for the control it offers over the ripping, the plugins for stuff like HDCP decryption, the metadata (just checked a new Rush CD: dBpoweramp has it, MC doesn't) and, most importantly, for the AccurateRip database check.

And then I import into MC for all the tagging/cleanup work.

AndyU:
Have to say I have found dBpoweramp preferable to MC for ripping. Whenever I compared speeds, dBpoweramp would be substantially quicker, and it's metadata retrieval is more comprehensive. You get a choice of metadata from four different sources; I pick the set  that I prefer and modify any tags I want to before ripping. You might as well get Genre if it's there. And very usefully dBpoweramp gives you ComposerSort and ArtistSort tags which makes life easier for organising some important views. This experience is based on ripping a lot of classical music. It may be that if you are just ripping standard rock stuff then these things are less important - though the speed advantage of dBp, especially if you have a mountain of cds to get through, is non-trivial ime.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page