INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Your ripping preferences?  (Read 5806 times)

benrad

  • Guest
Your ripping preferences?
« on: March 30, 2004, 11:48:27 pm »

I'm not sure if this has ever been asked here before but I'm just curious as to how everyone rips their files, and to what format.

I've settled on VBR MP3s, after years of going all over the place.
I use MC to rip with external LAME and --alt preset standard to encode.
I'm no expert in these matters, but this is just what I think sounds good.

I've seen people talk about APE, OGG, and WMA, but I've never ventured into those formats?

discuss.
Logged

gpvillamil

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 829
  • Listen to the music...
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2004, 01:14:03 am »

This is a frequently asked question here.

The consensus (I think) is that MP3 VBR using LAME --alt presets is the best option, if disk space matters. The files are reasonably sized, sound good and play everywhere.

If disk space does not matter, then lossless APE or FLAC is the way to go. MC has built-in support for APE (and close ties with the developer) and there is a plugin with pretty complete support for FLAC.

In the future, AAC/MP4 is probably the way to go, but it does not seem to be supported in MC for encoding or tagging (yet).
Logged

Sauzee

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 714
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2004, 05:31:19 am »

If you want or need to rip at low bit rates then ogg is probably the best format.  

Like mp3 preset standard ogg's bit rate is variable.  However it's much quicker than encoding in mp3 VBR.

Downside of Ogg is that there isn't much hardware support for it.
Logged

EpF

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #3 on: March 31, 2004, 04:23:30 pm »

I'm in the process of ripping my whole CD collection, and I'm using Monkey's Audio.  For lossy compression I use Lame --alt-preset standard.

pipsqueak

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 689
  • "Actually, it's elementary, my dear Dawson!"
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2004, 05:09:46 pm »

after much thought, a bunch of posts here, and advice (thanks to xen, jlee and others) i decided on:

mp3 vbr
--alt-preset extreme

great quality and i can stick it on a handheld with no problems

xen-uno

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • Checking your hard disk for errors...
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #5 on: March 31, 2004, 05:48:47 pm »

EAC (secure)>FLAC 1.1 @ comp 6

from there...
1) ogg 1.01 @ -q 7 or 8 (via OggDropXPd)

and the others (when needed)...
2) LAME 3.92 VBR mp3 @ --alt-preset standard (on hold...waiting for LameDropXPd to directly support flacs)
3) mpc 1.15r(A) @ --quality 7 --xlevel (via MPC Batch Encoder...haven't figured out how to get the flac tags to pass on to the mpc's yet)

10-27

zev...what's mpc?

benrad

  • Guest
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #6 on: March 31, 2004, 05:58:26 pm »

LamedropXPd looks interesting...does the developer have a homepage? I'm not finding anything in Google.
Logged

xen-uno

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • Checking your hard disk for errors...
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2004, 06:09:59 pm »

http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html

scroll down to Lamedrop

There really isn't an LD homepage, but doing a search at Hydrogen Audio will bear fruit.

10-27

edit: and LD does directly support ape's

lalittle

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3964
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2004, 06:18:04 pm »

Just to offer an alternative opinion, I ended up settling on mp3 CBR at 160kbps.  I found that with an iPod (my primary purpose for ripping CD's), using VBR would often result in the last portion of songs getting slightly cut off -- not much, but enough to notice on songs that led directly from one to the next with no gap.  CBR rips didn't have as much of a problem in this regard.  I tend to have a lot of albums with no gaps between songs, so this was effecting me.  I ended up at CBR 160 since I couldn't hear any difference between this and higher bitrates in the listenning environments where I was using the iPod (i.e. in the car for example.)  If I want to listen on a "real" system where subtle differences are more discernable, I'll just listen to the original CD.

Larry
Logged

Sauzee

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 714
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #9 on: April 01, 2004, 01:25:14 am »

Quote
I ended up at CBR 160 since I couldn't hear any difference between this and higher bitrates in the listenning environments where I was using the iPod

lalittle

I agree that ultimately it's up to what you can hear. Ironically, as I've learnt more about encoding, I've come to rely more on my own perceptions and less on what the experts say.
Logged

DJMUK

  • Regular Member
  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #10 on: April 01, 2004, 02:41:07 am »

I re-ripped al my CD's last/this year to Ape for the sole reason I would then have a true copy that I could convert to any format present or future without re-ripping.  I then saved these to DVD for storage.

For day to day playing I found (and the Wife even agreed) that MP3 192 CBR was the lowest we could use through our hi-fi without being able to tell the difference from the original.

I also have a Zen Xtra 60GB player and copy these MP3 to it as needed.  I used CBR rather than VBR as I think at the time it was a bit dubious as to wether VBR would work well on the Zen.

David
Logged

lalittle

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3964
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #11 on: April 01, 2004, 03:41:30 am »

Quote
I found (and the Wife even agreed) that MP3 192 CBR was the lowest we could use through our hi-fi without being able to tell the difference from the original.

Just to be clear, the only systems and/or environments where I listen to mp3's are rather poor -- i.e. in the car, etc.  For this type of environment, I don't think there's any real advantage of going over 160kpbs, and the extra space gained from smaller rips is rather useful.  On a higher end system in a proper listenning environment, I prefer to always use the original CD.  I've never actually tested mp3's on a high end system.

As I mentioned, VBR presented some specific issues with the iPod that were avoided with CBR rips, so your suspicions regarding the Zen may have been well founded.

Larry
Logged

DJMUK

  • Regular Member
  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #12 on: April 01, 2004, 04:47:35 am »

Quote
I found (and the Wife even agreed) that MP3 192 CBR was the lowest we could use through our hi-fi without being able to tell the difference from the original.

Just to be clear, the only systems and/or environments where I listen to mp3's are rather poor -- i.e. in the car, etc.  For this type of environment, I don't think there's any real advantage of going over 160kpbs, and the extra space gained from smaller rips is rather useful.  On a higher end system in a proper listenning environment, I prefer to always use the original CD.  I've never actually tested mp3's on a high end system.

Yes, I agree, for portable use it really does depends on the listenning environment.  It's nice to have the space on the Zen to be able to use the higher quality for the times when, say, your in a quiet place but when I am commuting by train its just overkill.

For serious listenning the CD is, of course, the first choice and I would always use these for classical music.  I have thought about ripping these to Ape for playing but have not done any testing so far.

As we were happy with the 192 CBR's, after a lot of testing,  it makes playing the other types of music so much easier when you dont have to find the CD(s)!  I know a lot of people like to review the sleeve notes while listening, so you need access to the CD, but as we are both quite badly partially sighted I am going to scanned all these and save them as PDF files. We can then zoom them up to any size.

As an aside one of the reasons I use MC is that, when I first started out with MJv7, it was so much better than others I tried in terms of being usable with our limited sight.  All those wonderful thing added since have just been icing on the cake and for such reasonable upgrade fees!  May JRiver and MC 'live long and prosper'.

David
Logged

lalittle

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3964
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2004, 05:11:28 am »

The thing that always prevents me from using mp3s for any serious listenning -- even at 320kbps which is arguably indistinguishable from the original -- is the gap in between songs, which is apparently simply part of the mp3 format.  This will always stand in the way of taking mp3s seriously for me.

The think that REALLY steams me is the fact that AAC, which is essentially slated to be the next big standard, has the exact same issue.  Apparently the people who created these formats only listen to pop music where songs always start and end in silence.

Larry
Logged

zevele10

  • Guest
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2004, 10:57:44 am »

There is to be Silence before a start and Silence after the end ,no?

I do not understand what you want to say.
Logged

lalittle

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3964
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #15 on: April 01, 2004, 01:27:30 pm »

There is to be Silence before a start and Silence after the end ,no?

I do not understand what you want to say.

With mp3s, a bit of silence is added at the in between every song.  On an album that has continuous music that does not "stop" between tracks, this creates a disruptive little gap that should not be there.

Larry
Logged

enigman

  • Regular Member
  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • thinking...
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #16 on: April 01, 2004, 02:14:12 pm »

From what I've read (and to a limited level experienced), the Lame MP3 decoder will automatically compensate for the silence that is added at the beginning of the track, as long as the original MP3 was compressed using Lame.  I know MC uses Lame for MP3 encoding, but I think it uses it's own code for the decoding (Lame, for one, supports Freeformat MP3s - ones with weird or high bitrates, whereas MC does not).  Perhaps in a future iteration of MC we will see some sort of mechanism to compensate for these pauses...

For now, I'm in the process of ripping my entire collection to APE - desktop hard drives are too cheap not to use a lossless format like APE.  As long as you have a good sound card and get a perfect rip off of the CD, APEs should be even better than then real thing (CD) since APEs have advanced error correction built in, whereas the error correction on a standard audio CD is basic at best - and read errors (while generally hardly noticeable) are actually quite common.

Once I've got everything as APE, I'll easily be able to convert to 128 kbps or 192 kpbs MP3, Ogg, or whatever new format comes out for my portable player, without ever having to worry about not being able to go back to the original lossless recording.  I'm sure there will be a new standard that will come out soon with better compression, no gaps or pauses, and all sorts of other cool bells and whistles...
Logged

fex

  • Guest
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2004, 02:58:45 pm »

For now, I'm in the process of ripping my entire collection to APE - desktop hard drives are too cheap not to use a lossless format like APE...

I have a few CD's (MC says 214 GB or 137.2 days - between 128 and 192 CBR). So I'm curious how much space a CD ripped to APE needs comparing to MP3 192 CBR. Today I'm not willing to pay a few hundred $ more for 'cheap' hard drives?
Logged

enigman

  • Regular Member
  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • thinking...
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2004, 03:50:29 pm »

A lot more :-)

My APEs tend to range from 500-900 kbps, or 3-5 x the size of 192 kbps MP3s.  Of course, if you've got a collection that is already that huge, its probably not worth going to APE, since you'd have to rerip everything (there's not much point in converting from an MP3 to APE, since you've already hit a lossy step)  and that would take just short of forever.
Logged

fex

  • Guest
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2004, 04:37:51 pm »

Oh - oh. I'll need a second or two to make my decision. ::)

No, not what you think. What the hell are, let's say, 1'200 $ more or less (whitout the chance of a backup).

Time is money! ;)
Logged

EpF

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #20 on: April 01, 2004, 07:04:34 pm »

For now, I'm in the process of ripping my entire collection to APE - desktop hard drives are too cheap not to use a lossless format like APE...

I have a few CD's (MC says 214 GB or 137.2 days - between 128 and 192 CBR). So I'm curious how much space a CD ripped to APE needs comparing to MP3 192 CBR. Today I'm not willing to pay a few hundred $ more for 'cheap' hard drives?

I've just finished ripping all my cds to ape, which amounted to around 360-370 full albums, and another assortment of 30-40 EPs and singles.  The whole lot now resides on my Maxtor Firewire drive, taking up 105-odd GB of space there (leaving me with around another 130 GB to fill up...!).  

The drive cost me around 300 Euro (I think that's around $350).  If anyone is planning to buy one of those or a similar large drive, I bought it from 'Komplett', who are based in Europe, and it was around 50 Euro cheaper there than anywhere else I looked...  ;D

Listening to: Grand Drive - 'Farewell To The Past', from 'Unconditionally Guaranteed 4'

Scarpad

  • Regular Member
  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Change this by choosing profile
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #21 on: April 01, 2004, 11:00:42 pm »

I've started doing everything in lossless Wma. I was using 256 bitrate mp3's. After comparing the two the lossless format has a fullness that's simply missing in the compressed mp3.
Logged

GHammer

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1930
  • Stereotypes are a real timesaver!
APE & APL
« Reply #22 on: April 02, 2004, 09:10:21 am »

I settled on APE for storage and day to day listening on on computer.

I use EAC to rip the CDs because it will create a cue sheet.

I then use the cue sheet with MakeAPL from the standalone version of APE. APL files are links to the selections inside the whole ape file.

The APLs I use as selections in the MC library. I can tag them, analyze, anything you can do with a 'normal' selection. When I want to listen to a CD without pause, I use the APE file. When I want to make portable versions, I convert to whatever format I want.

Works very well. Most the CDs I have ripped are 230-250 Mb as an APE file.

If MC created and read cue files, I'd never have to leave it for anything. I like the way it rips CDs, very reliable. But without the cue suport, I can't use it for ripping.
Logged

urlwolf

  • Regular Member
  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 235
  • building gomotron!
Re:Your ripping preferences?
« Reply #23 on: April 05, 2004, 02:30:49 pm »

I use ogg -q6 from MC, but am thinking on sticking to a lossless format for the future.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up