Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Talisker]

I am in the middle of ripping some CD's. I have noticed that MC recognises the bitrate of the tracks on the disc as 1411 yet when I go to rip them it will degrade them to anywhere between, 826-1041.

1. Why is MC degrading the bitrate?

2. Can I choose FLAC/WAV output instead of APE?

3. What is the default rip speed? Can this be changed to ensure lossless conversion?

[Hendrik]

If you rip to a compressed format like APE or FLAC, it'll reduce the bitrate, because thats what compression does. It will NOT alter the quality of the audio in any way, it'll just need less space to save them. FLAC and APE are both  "lossless" compressions, which means no quality is lost when compressing.

You can configure which format to encode rips to in the Options under Encoding, select "CD Ripping" in the "Encodind for" dropdown on top of the screen.
There is options for both FLAC or "Uncompressed Wave" (WAV)

[Talisker]

Thanks for the info!

I was under the impression that bitrate is the quality? I have a track in my library with a bitrate of 3072. When I compare this with the usual bitrate of 1411 there is a significant difference in quality.

[astromo]

Here's some relevant reading / background:
http://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/Lossless_Compression

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitrate#Audio

That's just the tip of the iceberg .. enjoy .. 

[6233638]

I was under the impression that bitrate is the quality? I have a track in my library with a bitrate of 3072. When I compare this with the usual bitrate of 1411 there is a significant difference in quality.

Bitrate is file size divided by time.
 
If you are compressing the file (even losslessly) the size goes down, and so the bitrate is lower even if the audio is the same.

[Talisker]

Thanks for the info....

I guess it must be the "placebo" effect when I am almost certain that there is a significant difference between the 895 ape file compared to the 1411 wav file?

My ears do not often fool me  ?

[AndrewFG]

Thanks for the info....

I guess it must be the "placebo" effect when I am almost certain that there is a significant difference between the 895 ape file compared to the 1411 wav file?

My ears do not often fool me  ?

You are not wrong!  

As the previous poster stated:  (bit rate) := (file size) / (duration) ...
but strictly it is (also) defined as:   (bit rate) := (sample rate) x (bit depth) x (channels) x (format compression factor)

For uncompressed lossless audio files like WAV and AIF the "format compression factor" is always 1.0 but for clever lossless formats like FLAC or ALAC the "format compression factor" is in a range of about 0.3 .. 1.0 depending on the source material.

So as a general rule -- assuming constant "format compression factor" -- the higher the bit rate, the better the quality...

[Talisker]

Thanks Andrew!

For some reason I got lost in confusion when reading the links posted above about bit rate and lossless audio.

Your explanation is crystal clear!

[JimH]

I guess it must be the "placebo" effect when I am almost certain that there is a significant difference between the 895 ape file compared to the 1411 wav file?

It isn't possible.  The digital to analog conversion process sees identical streams of bits from both.  Any lossless format will be identical to WAV at this stage.  So what you hear is identical.

[Talisker]

One more question... The slower the Read speed the better?

http://puu.sh/6ByUq.png

[Listener]

One more question... The slower the Read speed the better?

http://puu.sh/6ByUq.png

Max speed works fine.  If MC says that a secure rip is successful, that's as good as it gets. 

You may find an occasional  CD that MC says it can't rip with confidence in the result.   Trying again at 4X speed is one thing to try in those rare cases.  However, ripping the problem CD with a different CD/DVD drive is more likely to give a successful secure rip.
 

[Talisker]

Great... thanks!