INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: EAC vs. CDex  (Read 4870 times)

JaredH

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 520
  • Superfluously Articulate
EAC vs. CDex
« on: September 22, 2002, 04:06:44 pm »

OK, i know i may be starting a war here because i know there are a lot of die-hard EAC fans here, but what are everyones opinion about using EAC vs. CDex. I know EAC has detailed properties for CD manipulation and separating tracks and such. But on the subject of ripping and encoding, what are your opinions?
Logged
J. A. Hayslett

Blog & Gallery - http://www.bgracetfaith.net

sekim

  • Guest
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2002, 04:23:17 pm »

Here we go...again. Not to be a stick in the mud, but just how many times does other software get thrown into MJs arena?

True, many use it. But in most situations MJ will rip a copy every bit as good as the others. And, I know I'll get toasted for saying this, you probably can not tell the difference between the rips. The others have a potential edge in some of the secure or paranoid modes. And that's with badly damaged discs'. But that's about it.

You can say after analyzing the files thru some this or that program EAC or CDex gave me two bits more on a rip then MJ. Gee, really? Maybe you ought to do something different with your music, like listen to it.

Perhaps MJs ripping will improve with the addition of adding cue sheets or m3u or whatever. But for most persons needs it does fine.
Logged

Matt

  • Administrator
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 42388
  • Shoes gone again!
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2002, 08:17:50 pm »

Media Jukebox is an awesome ripper -- it's fast, supports on-the-fly encoding, and even has a great secure mode that's arguably better than EAC's.  So, I wouldn't use EAC or CDex...
Logged
Matt Ashland, JRiver Media Center

Mirko

  • Regular Member
  • Galactic Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 495
  • Coffee ready?
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #3 on: September 22, 2002, 08:58:18 pm »

Just my two cents:

MJ does a fine job ripping, if the CDs are good or perfect quality. If MJ has to use "digital secure ripping", it slows down quite a lot. More than EAC.

As I have many older CDs, I ripped nearly all of my collection using EAC. Every new CD, however, can be ripped by MJ without disadvantage.

Both tools have CDDB-lookup and MJ can even download the cover art. But EAC can start multiple lame-tasks parallel (I personally use 2 of them). And with EAC I can rip more CDs at one time using two drives and then 2 lame-tasks. So here is a speedissue involved.

But, really, I would use MJs ripping abilities more often, if they were improved a bit (parallel encoding, multiple drive ripping). As far as I see, JRiver is doing a very good in improving things, so I'm quite optimistic.
Logged

phelt

  • Guest
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #4 on: September 22, 2002, 11:57:33 pm »

I've never had MJ rip and encode simultaneously regardless of what I choose in settings, and I like being able to set encoder instances as Mirko points out, so it's still EAC for me. Plus I like being able to easily switch to a Various Artists naming scheme.

I've only tried CDex for a short while - already gotten used to EAC and didn't see a reason to switch. If CDex can use any external DLL's or EXE's and command-line options, I don't think there would be a difference in encoding other than number of threads.
Logged

zevele10

  • Guest
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2002, 12:07:29 am »

MachineHead

If such 'test' are coming from regular members,i think they are fine.
They can help in 2 ways

To get some more settings\feature in MJ

To show that MJ stands at the same level than any other program.

I would use MJ to rip if it had A PLAY A SOUND WHEN RIP FINISH.

Since 25 years it is on the wish list,but look like it is a very very difficult feature to put in the program......
Logged

sekim

  • Guest
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2002, 12:56:16 am »

zevele,

Don't get me wrong here. I've seen this thing many times before. It still amazes me though, that you will get a bunch of people saying they get bit for bit perfect copy with EAC and then encode to a lossy format. ???

What's the point if your going to throw away those perfect bits? As far as ripping for me, I usually go with ape or wav and then convert format overnight or while at work. The speed this way is much faster then even several instances of another ripper. How could this be you ask? I'm not there watching it. Time has no bearing this way. When I return eveything is in order and done. I did a batch convert of over three hundred files a while back. Took almost a day and a half, but since I avoided the computer, it really didn't matter to me. And the copies are perfect, to me. I cannot find any glitches, pops, squeals, or any type of artifact in them.

Moral: MJ did just as well as anything out there.
Logged

Mirko

  • Regular Member
  • Galactic Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 495
  • Coffee ready?
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2002, 01:40:57 am »

MachineHead,

especially for lossy format encoding it is crucial, that the original file is as perfect as possible. The encoding usually lowers quality a bit. But it would lower it even...lower... if the original signal is not a perfect one. So "digital secure ripping" is quite important for lossy encoders.

Lossless encoders on the other hand are not so crucial about a perfect signal, because they don't lessen the quality per definition as do lossy encoders.

Mirko
Logged

zevele10

  • Guest
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2002, 05:36:11 am »

MachineHead

I agree with you ripping to APE and converting when away from the computer.It is how i do when wanting good convertion.Anyway i never use my computer when ripping or converting.

Because of it i am mad about the fact that we do not have a 'play a sound when ripping finish'

I found a program ripping to APE slower than MJ,but i use it,because with the sound ,i know when one cd finish.
With MJ ,i forget and remember about to rip yhe next cd after 30-40 minutes.
In fact i rip more cds in few hours with the slow program playing a sound.

When  ripping for people who don't care,i use RealJuke box 'mp3 on the fly' it is fast and there is a sound played when cds finish.

I did many tests trying to find a way to encode 'on the fly' to mp3 with the same encoder than MJ and with the same settings in a faster way.If you find faster,it is so litlle faster than better to use MJ.


The concert yesterday was great.Salem just AMAZING.
They may turn in Europe.In this case as opening act.Let me tell you that the band after would have to be very good...

As you know ,i am not a metalhead,but yesterday was the best concert i saw this year

Listening now to AEBA.
A german band.They play here next month.
The first band from abroad to play here since more than 2 years.I got the tickets today and they last cd was at nice price,so i brought it.

I like it,but cannot tell you if it is black,death...I am not yet 'metal' enought to know all the genres.
Except industrial metal and doom metal,the 2 kind of metal i like the most
Logged

Bill Ko

  • Regular Member
  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2002, 05:51:53 am »

Maybe J River should contact the maker of EAC so they can roll it into MJ.  Then you can have the best of both worlds, and the maker of EAC will finally get a few bucks for his hard work.  ;)

Bill
Logged

JohnT

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 4627
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #10 on: September 23, 2002, 06:26:36 am »

I just thought of a cool feature to add to MJ version 9. How about making a sound when the ripping process is complete? I don't know how I come up with these great ideas all the time    ;D

- John T.
JRiver, Inc.
Logged
John Thompson, JRiver Media Center

zevele10

  • Guest
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2002, 10:47:26 am »

I never thought of it ,but can be very cooool!
To the point to put it in 8
Logged

phelt

  • Guest
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #12 on: September 23, 2002, 11:00:31 am »

Quote
I just thought of a cool feature to add to MJ version 9. How about making a sound when the ripping process is complete? I don't know how I come up with these great ideas all the time    ;D

- John T.
JRiver, Inc.


As long as one can turn it off, please  :)
Logged

sekim

  • Guest
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #13 on: September 23, 2002, 04:26:36 pm »

zevele,

My sound is when the cd drawer opens. CLUNK. Done.  ;D

Logged

Tolga

  • Regular Member
  • Galactic Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: EAC vs. CDex
« Reply #14 on: September 23, 2002, 06:46:12 pm »

I have connected the cd drawer to fire alarm. Each time a cd is ripped, the fire department notifies me.  ;)
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up