Print

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

[BrianKW]

Hello,

Does anyone know which one is more accurate for archiving my CD collection?
I want to put my CDs on an external drive to access them for my Pono and store my CDs away.

[REShaman]

Hello,

Does anyone know which one is more accurate for archiving my CD collection?
I want to put my CDs on an external drive to access them for my Pono and store my CDs away.

My response will mismatch your query. I prefer to use XLD, Max, or lately dBpoweramp for Mac (or Windows if necessary) instead of PMW (nothing personal Pono people). Never used EAC, so I can not comment. I also prefer AIFF to FLAC. So I may not be persuasive about anything I offer except to comment that I enjoy my CD rips to my custom NY Limited Chrome Pono Player and from my external Promise Pegasus Raid 5 R6 12TB to Mac Mini via Amarra Symphony with iRC or HQPlayer 3.7.1. At least my perspective opens up possibilities (Smile).

Enjoy the music,
Richard

[JimH]

There is no advantage to using another ripper.  PMW will do it as well as any.  But others should also work.

[Cheezmo]

There is no advantage to using another ripper.  PMW will do it as well as any.  But others should also work.

Does PMW use the AccurateRip or a similar database to verify that the CD rips are 100% accurate?

If not, than XLD or EAC with AccurateRip is definitely an advantage.  Even if both are equally successful, knowing if you got a perfect rip or not is very important (as cleaning the disc, etc. might yield improvement).

[BrianKW]

Does PMW use the AccurateRip or a similar database to verify that the CD rips are 100% accurate?

If not, than XLD or EAC with AccurateRip is definitely an advantage.  Even if both are equally successful, knowing if you got a perfect rip or not is very important (as cleaning the disc, etc. might yield improvement).

Great question as I agree.
AccurateRip ensures you get the Rip the majority have gotten...no?

[REShaman]

Does PMW use the AccurateRip or a similar database to verify that the CD rips are 100% accurate?

If not, than XLD or EAC with AccurateRip is definitely an advantage.  Even if both are equally successful, knowing if you got a perfect rip or not is very important (as cleaning the disc, etc. might yield improvement).

My recommendations use AccurateRip. Not sure if PMW does. I think it does not but JimH should be able to provide a definitive answer. If I am wrong, apologize in advance.
Best,
Richard

[BrianKW]

My recommendations use AccurateRip. Not sure if PMW does. I think it does not but JimH should be able to provide a definitive answer. If I am wrong, apologize in advance.
Best,
Richard

Cheers, Richard.

I'd try dBpoweramp for Windows but I believe you have to pay for it.

[JimH]

Accuraterip isn't needed for modern drives.  If you're doubtful about quality, use Secure Rip.

[BrianKW]

Accuraterip isn't needed for modern drives.  If you're doubtful about quality, use Secure Rip.

Isn't Securerip only within dB?
Why pay for what EAC and Accu can do?

[Awesome Donkey]

Isn't Securerip only within dB?

No, (most) modern ripping software including Pono Music World, JRiver Media Center, Exact Audio Copy, XLD, dBpoweramp, etc. all have secure ripping as an option. AccurateRip was useful back in the days when drives were unreliable but if you use secure ripping you shouldn't need AccurateRip. Read this for more information on secure ripping.

[BrianKW]

No, (most) modern ripping software including Pono Music World, JRiver Media Center, Exact Audio Copy, XLD, dBpoweramp, etc. all have secure ripping as an option. AccurateRip was useful back in the days when drives were unreliable but if you use secure ripping you shouldn't need AccurateRip. Read this for more information on secure ripping.

Cheers!

[Cheezmo]

Accuraterip isn't needed for modern drives.  If you're doubtful about quality, use Secure Rip.

I completely disagree.  I have several computers with "modern" drives and often have a CD with a scratch or something that one can accurately rip and another can not.

If you don't use AccurateRip, you are probably fine 99% of the time, but down the road when you play a track though headphones and hear a click, you'll wonder how many of your rips are messed up and never know, until you rip them all and verify with AccurateRip.  Do it right the first time.

[Awesome Donkey]

I completely disagree.  I have several computers with "modern" drives and often have a CD with a scratch or something that one can accurately rip and another can not.

That's what secure ripping is for - it reads the disc multiple times to test/verify before copying. If it encounters errors during either the test or copy phase, it'll tell you.

[Awesome Donkey]

Secure ripping is the process of making sure there were no errors during the extraction of audio from a CD. It normally involves attempting to get consistent results from successive re-reads of the same sectors, and is sometimes combined with other strategies, such as

• using the drive's own error reporting (after its own error correction fails) to know which sectors to re-read
• defeating caches (some drives cache audio data during DAE)
• and comparing checksums of extracted audio with those obtained by others.

The basic function of ripping software is to get the CD's table of contents (an index of track start positions), and then for each track to be ripped, it tells the CD drive to go to the beginning of each of the track's data blocks (sectors) and read them in, one at a time. On an ordinary audio CD, each block is 2352 bytes and corresponds to 1/75th of a second of sound. The software saves that incoming data into an audio file (WAV or AIFF format, usually, as those formats are almost identical to the data coming in from the drive), or the software streams the data into another audio encoder "on the fly", so the user doesn't have to convert it to another format like MP3 in a separate step.
This sounds simple, but it becomes complicated when parts of the CD can't be read accurately, for example due to scratches. And there's actually a lot of variation in whether each drive can reliably and accurately go to the spot it's told to read, and in the way it detects, reports, and handles errors, such as those caused by scratches. That is, every CD drive will give the ripping software 2352 bytes of data for each block the drive is told to read, but that data might be different each time, due to physical problems with the disc or limitations of the drive's hardware. Or the data might be the same each time, but is different when obtained from a different drive.
Ripping software that claims to have "secure ripping" will take into account the capabilities and limitations of the drive, and will make the drive read each sector multiple times. Then it will use various methods of analysis and re-reading to ensure that the data was read as correctly as possible. A bit-perfect rip may not always be possible, and so these programs will report on any errors that could not be corrected, allowing you to examine or attempt to correct the problems, such as by generating a log of suspicious positions or doing some kind of automatic "glitch removal".
The term "secure ripping" is usually used in opposition to "burst mode", which implies the drive is simply told to read a range of blocks just once, and the incoming data is accepted without any extra error detection or correction by the software. Since it doesn't involve re-reading of data (other than what the drive might always do automatically), burst mode is naturally faster than secure ripping.

[Cheezmo]

OK, as long as Pono's secure ripping feature lets you know if there is any kind of error, I would agree it is just as good.

But, I notice in that definition of secure ripping, the 3rd step is basically AccurateRip, comparing against a known good checksum.

I'm just saying that is a prudent step to be 100% sure you haven't got any errors.

[JimH]

OK, as long as Pono's secure ripping feature lets you know if there is any kind of error, I would agree it is just as good.

But, I notice in that definition of secure ripping, the 3rd step is basically AccurateRip, comparing against a known good checksum.

I'm just saying that is a prudent step to be 100% sure you haven't got any errors.

If PMW doesn't find errors, there aren't any.  AccurateRip was useful many years ago when drives were less reliable.  It's pointless now, in my opinion.

[BrianKW]

Thanks you for all the great input, guys.

[BrianKW]

If PMW doesn't find errors, there aren't any.  AccurateRip was useful many years ago when drives were less reliable.  It's pointless now, in my opinion.

So I did a rip with PMW last night and under options I chose secure.
The rip finished with no report.
So i'm to assume it's accurate?
What did the secure choice do and why even give us that option when it should be obvious we want accuracy.
I'm mostly concerned that i chose the right options for an accurate bit by bit rip.

[Awesome Donkey]

I'm not sure if it's the same in PMW or not, but you can try going into the options then CD, DVD & BD section and click the drop down menu on CD Ripping then click the drop down menu on File Management and it should have an option Auto-create log file in secure rip mode. That'll generate a log for you.

[BrianKW]

I'm not sure if it's the same in PMW or not, but you can try going into the options then CD, DVD & BD section and click the drop down menu on CD Ripping then click the drop down menu on File Management and it should have an option Auto-create log file in secure rip mode. That'll generate a log for you.

Cheers, Awsome!
I found the file management in a different configuration and clicked on the create log.
I'm ripping as I type and chew gum

[BrianKW]

OK...
I just finished and looked at the log and all the songs say "secure rip~no re tries"
I guess that means it's a accurate bit by bit rip...yes?

[Awesome Donkey]

OK...
I just finished and looked at the log and all the songs say "secure rip~no re tries"
I guess that means it's a accurate bit by bit rip...yes?

Correct.

[BrianKW]

Correct.

Cheers, Awesome.
You're not only awesome but a scholar and a gentleman!