INTERACT FORUM

More => Old Versions => Media Center 15 (Development Ended) => Topic started by: drmimosa on September 11, 2010, 10:30:21 am

Title: EAC vs. MC 15
Post by: drmimosa on September 11, 2010, 10:30:21 am

I'd like to know more about MC's ripping function, I use FLAC lossless compression to store CD audio. Does it compare favorably to the program Exact Audio Copy? Also, does it use error correction, can it handle CD's that have scratches or skips?

Thanks!

Title: Re: EAC vs. MC 15
Post by: Matt on September 11, 2010, 10:36:33 am

Media Center has very good secure ripping.  It reads each sector at least twice, and defeats drive caching.

It gives you a report at the end of each rip, and if it tells you that you have a secure rip, you can take it to the bank.

Title: Re: EAC vs. MC 15
Post by: glynor on September 11, 2010, 10:45:39 am

Ooh.  Welcome back.  Did you have a nice trip?

PS. MC's secure ripping mode is awesome.  Try it.

Title: Re: EAC vs. MC 15
Post by: drmimosa on September 11, 2010, 11:56:25 am

@Glynor,  Thanks, I guess you saw my post from yesterday! User error strikes again. I ran a bunch of checks on my system, and there was trojan/spyware on my computer (I took the problem post down, I have appreciated the advice from this forum very much and didn't want to leave "bad press" up.) Solved it the old-fashioned way, reinstalled Win7... J River reinstalled with no problem, but I lost some customizations.

Any way to save custom views and library settings etc. for in-case-of-emergency reinsallations?

@Matt, That sounds great, I'll move to MC for ripping in FLAC. I had problems before with the EAC program anyway, so if your software runs comparable (or better) error-checking features I'd give it a try.

Thanks again,

Phil

Title: Re: EAC vs. MC 15
Post by: flac.rules on September 12, 2010, 02:48:29 pm

Error checking seems comparable in my tests, but MC doesn't do offset-correction the same way. If that doesn't matter for you I would use MC. EAC is a bit unstable and buggy as a program.

Title: Re: EAC vs. MC 15
Post by: Matias on September 12, 2010, 03:00:00 pm

I always used EAC and works fine.
I see no reason to replace it for MC.

Title: Re: EAC vs. MC 15
Post by: Von on September 12, 2010, 03:11:11 pm

I have recently switched from EAC to MC for ripping. My main reason for doing this was a much smoother (for me) workflow. I hesitated for a long time because of the lack of offset correction in MC. J River won't be adding that feature, it seems, so it's up to you to decide if you can live without it.

There is one thing, however, that I feel MC could improve a little when it comes to ripping, and that is the rip report. It currently states date and time, and of course track listing and all the relevant info such as re-reads, unreliable data, unreadable sectors etc if you have a troublesome rip. I think the report should also include MC version and drive name/model.

Title: Re: EAC vs. MC 15
Post by: mojave on September 15, 2010, 08:28:05 am

Quote from: Von on September 12, 2010, 03:11:11 pm

There is one thing, however, that I feel MC could improve a little when it comes to ripping, and that is the rip report. It currently states date and time, and of course track listing and all the relevant info such as re-reads, unreliable data, unreadable sectors etc if you have a troublesome rip. I think the report should also include MC version and drive name/model.

This is coming in a future build:

"Changed: Secure CD rip report now includes program name/version and CD drive model and settings info."