Best program ....
- Thread starter poncil
- Start date
The best software to get the best quality is EAC ( from w*w.exactaudiocopy.com ) This extracts it to a WAV file, then use RasorLame ( from h**p://www.dors.de/razorlame/ ) to convert that to an MP3. They are also simple to use as well.
noman68
1
yup...
go with lame.... winlame/command line or eac...
do NOT think about anything else.... lame rule....
a. winlame/eac wav 2 mp3..
b. feurio with lame for mp3 2 wav/cd (just in case..)
wavelab is outstanding when u wanna edit a wav,
but as long steinberg choose 2 work with fraunhofer..
( e same goes 4 ahead)
feurio it is...
flame.. flame..
go with lame.... winlame/command line or eac...
do NOT think about anything else.... lame rule....
a. winlame/eac wav 2 mp3..
b. feurio with lame for mp3 2 wav/cd (just in case..)
wavelab is outstanding when u wanna edit a wav,
but as long steinberg choose 2 work with fraunhofer..
( e same goes 4 ahead)
feurio it is...
flame.. flame..
EAC is the only cd ripper and LAME the only mp3 encoder you should use (possibly 3.90alpha verisons 
). Others sux. In speed, in quality, in stability... they sux.
Here the optimal settings for mp3 encoding using lame (you can enter this string in compression options from eac if you want):
for internet sharing or normal purposes (recommended):
-b 192 -m s -q 0 --lowpass 19.5
for archival quality:
-b 256 -m s -q 0 --lowpass 19.5
If you find that your cd has a better quality than the "archival" mp3, then you're ripping with a program that is not eac or using eac with wrong settings.
If you can't hear differences between eac+lame and other programs, or if you don't hear differences between 128 and 196, then you have poor speakers, reader, ears (or you're listening to tunz tunz dance "music")
). Others sux. In speed, in quality, in stability... they sux.Here the optimal settings for mp3 encoding using lame (you can enter this string in compression options from eac if you want):
for internet sharing or normal purposes (recommended):
-b 192 -m s -q 0 --lowpass 19.5
for archival quality:
-b 256 -m s -q 0 --lowpass 19.5
If you find that your cd has a better quality than the "archival" mp3, then you're ripping with a program that is not eac or using eac with wrong settings.
If you can't hear differences between eac+lame and other programs, or if you don't hear differences between 128 and 196, then you have poor speakers, reader, ears (or you're listening to tunz tunz dance "music")
M
Master
Guest
Try this one cause it is a TOP freeware
h**p://www.cdex.n3.net/
h**p://www.cdex.n3.net/
U can't really go wrong with EAC/AudioCatalyst/AudioGrabber/or even the good old winDAC.
EAC & winDAC require U 2 first store UR songs as wav file then U have 2 convert them 2 mp3s. Suggestion 4 best mp3s is at least a 192bit conversion.
AC & AG will rip the songs directly (well almost directly) in2 mp3s.
Then U can use MP3cdMaker(use 1.50v) 2 put them on2 a regular CD 2 play on regular music CD components (like car stereo/walkman/etc...).
these R the easiest tools (oh did I 4get 2 mention U can also use Nero). Anyhow, 4 myself the easiest way 2 go is either
AC or winDAC & then MP3cdMaker, though all & other methods work well 2.
I just wanted 2 point out the easiest way 4 a newbie 2 go.
EAC & winDAC require U 2 first store UR songs as wav file then U have 2 convert them 2 mp3s. Suggestion 4 best mp3s is at least a 192bit conversion.
AC & AG will rip the songs directly (well almost directly) in2 mp3s.
Then U can use MP3cdMaker(use 1.50v) 2 put them on2 a regular CD 2 play on regular music CD components (like car stereo/walkman/etc...).
these R the easiest tools (oh did I 4get 2 mention U can also use Nero). Anyhow, 4 myself the easiest way 2 go is either
AC or winDAC & then MP3cdMaker, though all & other methods work well 2.
I just wanted 2 point out the easiest way 4 a newbie 2 go.
oops! thanks 4 pointing that out pokopiko =)
*sometimes my mind starts 2 wonder a bit while thinking of stuff*
*sometimes my mind starts 2 wonder a bit while thinking of stuff*
hmmmmmmmmmmm short note to add here and im sure Pok and many other power "BURNER" users will agree that even if you have the Best of the Best ripper and compressor that the quality of your hardware can also effect how the data is ripped and can even change the quality on burntime!
I know myself and Pok love to talk bout PLEXTOR for quality with audio extraction these teamed with EAC or even plxtors own plextools are excellent for ripping the disks and burning very good quality audio to even cheap branded media !
I myself unfortunatly had the displeasure of owning a TEAC at some point in life between others and that was just awful for ripping burning audio !? if they have improved on it since then i will never know because i got a plextor shortly afterwards lol and never looked back =) i havent had much experience with other burners with audio but my PLEXTOR is great flawless burns everytime and crisp sounding audio cds!
but if yer happy with yer burner then why change!?,unless you want to get serious and pay the extra lol !
Also note here unless you have a half decent cd rom drive like an ultra plex or sumthing then its better usually to rip in you writer has this has a better read head and is probs more accurate!
I know myself and Pok love to talk bout PLEXTOR for quality with audio extraction these teamed with EAC or even plxtors own plextools are excellent for ripping the disks and burning very good quality audio to even cheap branded media !
I myself unfortunatly had the displeasure of owning a TEAC at some point in life between others and that was just awful for ripping burning audio !? if they have improved on it since then i will never know because i got a plextor shortly afterwards lol and never looked back =) i havent had much experience with other burners with audio but my PLEXTOR is great flawless burns everytime and crisp sounding audio cds!
but if yer happy with yer burner then why change!?,unless you want to get serious and pay the extra lol !
Also note here unless you have a half decent cd rom drive like an ultra plex or sumthing then its better usually to rip in you writer has this has a better read head and is probs more accurate!
hmmmmmmmmmm never had a problem with bad media !? i buy bulk media in 100's at a time must be lucky i guess lol !?, but i will say one thing having used cdrs for a couple of years or maby more now lol lost count lol that the general "thickness" of a blank has got less !?
I dont know if you pok or anyone else has noticed this !? using blanks daily u get used to the feel of them and going through some backup disks when i first started burning way back i dont know when??!?? feel thicker to touch i havent got any technical equipment to measure but you can feel and see visably that they are a lot thinner now !? even quality branded ones have got thinner !? lol i guess things just aint what they used to be !?
So long as yer happy with yer liteon POK why change lol but i see you still resort back to your faithful ULTRA for reading hehehe
I dont know if you pok or anyone else has noticed this !? using blanks daily u get used to the feel of them and going through some backup disks when i first started burning way back i dont know when??!?? feel thicker to touch i havent got any technical equipment to measure but you can feel and see visably that they are a lot thinner now !? even quality branded ones have got thinner !? lol i guess things just aint what they used to be !?
So long as yer happy with yer liteon POK why change lol but i see you still resort back to your faithful ULTRA for reading hehehe
