Ok here goes: One mans experience and opinion about the over sampling ripping of ALL HIS CDs ...

LMAO...once again you beat be to the punch between composing posts. At least this time it's less than 8 minutes. :rflmao:
And here I am sitting on a beach in Hawaii right now replying with my phone! Something wrong with that I suppose... I never do vacations that well but listening to the waves is relaxing.. :D
tmp_29601-20170305_172012-1270286269.jpg
 
Allow me to now digress with an actual “on topic” post. :rflmao:

I think it’s gone long enough without saying that Bill’s “over sampling ripping of ALL HIS CDs” OP diatribe is a pretty fascinating study and definitive example of the power of preconceived notions, confirmation bias, and psychoacoustics. On behalf of the vast silent majority here....Thank you Bill. :)

I’m in no way advocating that lossy 192k rips are every Bit as good as lossless Redbook rips, up-sampled 16/44.1, or Hi-Res recordings. I just think this his experience as a former sound engineer, computer audio novice, and audiophile is worth noting in spades for the AK community as a whole.

Lossy audio notoriously & frequently gets a "really bad" rap around here these days. It's a well documented fact that the mind is a powerful beast and plays "tricks" but that axe swings both ways. Just because you can "go to 11" and/or read too much into the numbers (knowingly or unknowingly) doesn't by all cost mean, it is appreciably better. I venture to say that for the most part, most people here rip to lossless because of the "why not" factor. Nutin wrong with that...jus sayin'.

One could & should deem Bill & Co.s. initial SQ conclusions a defacto hard knock “triple blind” test. :)

P.S. Strip out all the streaming service bullshit added by myself and other side-trackers and make this thread a sticky!
 
Last edited:
Is the cover art lookup process with db any better than a google search + drag/drop in EAC?
Is an auto tag lookup in db any better than the one in EAC?
Most certainly! By default, it does both automatically within the application. Only for a couple of titles have I had to use an external source.

Is putting Windows Media in the same conversation as EAC and db a fair thing today?
Both have similar functionality, but I prefer EAC since it is inherently open source. And dbPowerAmp is even better.
 
Allow me to now digress with an actual “on topic” post. :rflmao:

I think it’s gone long enough without saying that Bill’s “over sampling ripping of ALL HIS CDs” OP diatribe is a pretty fascinating study and definitive example of the power of preconceived notions, confirmation bias, and psychoacoustics. On behalf of the vast silent majority here....Thank you Bill. :)

I’m in no way advocating that lossy 192k rips are every Bit as good as lossless Redbook rips, up-sampled 16/44.1, or Hi-Res recordings. I just think this his experience as a former sound engineer, computer audio novice, and audiophile is worth noting in spades for the AK community as a whole.

Lossy audio notoriously & frequently gets a "really bad" rap around here these days. It's a well documented fact that the mind is a powerful beast and plays "tricks" but that axe swings both ways. Just because you can "go to 11" and/or read too much into the numbers (knowingly or unknowingly) doesn't by all cost mean, it is appreciably better. I venture to say that for the most part, most people here rip to lossless because of the "why not" factor. Nutin wrong with that...jus sayin'.

One could & should deem Bill & Co.s. initial SQ conclusions a defacto hard knock “triple blind” test. :)

P.S. Strip out all the streaming service bullshit added by myself and other side-trackers and make this thread a sticky!
Thanks +48V :beerchug:
 
Most certainly! By default, it does both automatically within the application. Only for a couple of titles have I had to use an external source.


Both have similar functionality, but I prefer EAC since it is inherently open source. And dbPowerAmp is even better.

I'm not big on 'automatic' cover art lookup, to be honest. I prefer to see what's out there resolution-wise, and if it matches up with the copy I'm ripping.
I know the auto lookup with EAC is usually lower rez than I care for. It's become an old habit to just google the cover art, and have ready on the desktop to drag/drop when ripping. It only takes a few seconds.

My comment about Windows Media vs EAC was more about accuracy. Does WMP even support AccurateRip, or similar?
Being open source or not doesn't really bother me. Getting a proper rip the first time does.
I guess my question is, besides people that want a quick rip, does anybody doing it seriously actually use WMP for ripping? Last time I checked EAC has way more functionality.
 
Allow me to now digress with an actual “on topic” post. :rflmao:

I think it’s gone long enough without saying that Bill’s “over sampling ripping of ALL HIS CDs” OP diatribe is a pretty fascinating study and definitive example of the power of preconceived notions, confirmation bias, and psychoacoustics. On behalf of the vast silent majority here....Thank you Bill. :)

I’m in no way advocating that lossy 192k rips are every Bit as good as lossless Redbook rips, up-sampled 16/44.1, or Hi-Res recordings. I just think this his experience as a former sound engineer, computer audio novice, and audiophile is worth noting in spades for the AK community as a whole.

Lossy audio notoriously & frequently gets a "really bad" rap around here these days. It's a well documented fact that the mind is a powerful beast and plays "tricks" but that axe swings both ways. Just because you can "go to 11" and/or read too much into the numbers (knowingly or unknowingly) doesn't by all cost mean, it is appreciably better. I venture to say that for the most part, most people here rip to lossless because of the "why not" factor. Nutin wrong with that...jus sayin'.

One could & should deem Bill & Co.s. initial SQ conclusions a defacto hard knock “triple blind” test. :)

P.S. Strip out all the streaming service bullshit added by myself and other side-trackers and make this thread a sticky!
I have in the past based a lot of my bias towards cd quality playback over MP3 on what I have downloaded from Amazon and before that, iTunes. Amazon, when you buy a cd, you can download the MP3 version to listen to immediately. Those, for whatever reason sound not that good, some worse than others but none as good as the cd that comes in the mail.

However when I create a MP3 from the cd for use on my phone using JRiver, I have noticed considerable improvements over what I have found typical of lossy downloads which makes me wonder about the source. Since subscribing to standard (lossy) Tidal I have been pretty satisfied with the Sq on it. I run that music through my older model Modi from my pc while all my stored lossless is through the quiet Raspberry Pi and the new modi multibit DAC which to my ear is a much better DAC so it probably isn't a fair comparison. Maybe when I get back home I will run Tidal through the multibit for a while and listen to some familiar tunes.

As for psycho acoustics, I really don't know what to say at this point. I'm certain it happens, and I am not a big believer in the abx test or having friends over for listening sessions. I think you have to listen over a period of time to start to discern what is different, and then go back and listen to the other and whatnot. For me, at this point I'm more concerned about other parts of my vintage system but I think drive space being as cheap as it is, MP3's are not a consideration for me.
 
I'm not big on 'automatic' cover art lookup, to be honest. I prefer to see what's out there resolution-wise, and if it matches up with the copy I'm ripping.
What's automatic is the lookup. The photo below is the result of simply inserting the CD in the drive.

Accurate Rip and CRC, check. Tagging, check. Album art visuals and size, check. Click "Choose Art" to find alternatives. There were several, but the chosen one matches the media.

dbpoweramp.jpg



Does WMP even support AccurateRip, or similar?
Dunno. Never used it.

Last time I checked EAC has way more functionality.
Than WMP, yes. Not even close when compared to dbPoweramp's tool set having used both. Still have EAC, but never use it.
 
For me, at this point I'm more concerned about other parts of my vintage system but I think drive space being as cheap as it is, MP3's are not a consideration for me.
Personally, I only rip to lossless, as well. It is a more flexible format and better for archiving for that reason. I do listen to a lot of lossy music via Apple Music and it sounds good to me at the 256k AAC format they use. However, I have done AB tests in the past and I just don't typically listen to music with that kind of critical ear. I am mainly listening for enjoyment, and not for artifacts, so it becomes a non-issue for me. I would always recommend lossless for archiving, though.
 
., I have done AB tests in the past and I just don't typically listen to music with that kind of critical ear. I am mainly listening for enjoyment, and not for artifacts, so it becomes a non-issue for me. I would always recommend lossless for archiving, though.
That is probably a good place to be, because it is after all the music we are all after, and that can (or at least used to be) enjoyed on less than the best gear our savings can afford. I have been fussing with my system for a few years now and it has probably put me in a mindset of always working on improving the sound. That has extended to trying to get an the best source as well. However I am tired of always listening with a critical ear too. I also want to just listen to an ever expanding and broader base of music at this point. I am still new at streaming with Tidal as we just got a performance bump on our isp that allows at least the 320 kbps version to play without dropping out. It has already opened up my collection to new music I wouldn't have without it.

So is it still a collection if it is only streamed (rented) on Tidal? I suppose it doesn't matter.. If Tidal goes under I can still at that point buy what I liked from it on cd anyway..
 
That is probably a good place to be, because it is after all the music we are all after, and that can (or at least used to be) enjoyed on less than the best gear our savings can afford. I have been fussing with my system for a few years now and it has probably put me in a mindset of always working on improving the sound. That has extended to trying to get an the best source as well. However I am tired of always listening with a critical ear too. I also want to just listen to an ever expanding and broader base of music at this point. I am still new at streaming with Tidal as we just got a performance bump on our isp that allows at least the 320 kbps version to play without dropping out. It has already opened up my collection to new music I wouldn't have without it.

So is it still a collection if it is only streamed (rented) on Tidal? I suppose it doesn't matter.. If Tidal goes under I can still at that point buy what I liked from it on cd anyway..
Exactly, and you don't want to discount the experience of listening to that music just because you don't own it.
 
What's automatic is the lookup. The photo below is the result of simply inserting the CD in the drive.

Accurate Rip and CRC, check. Tagging, check. Album art visuals and size, check. Click "Choose Art" to find alternatives. There were several, but the chosen one matches the media.

dbpoweramp.jpg




Dunno. Never used it.


Than WMP, yes. Not even close when compared to dbPoweramp's tool set having used both. Still have EAC, but never use it.
I'm not seeing much there that is all that different than EAC. Sure it's not automatic when a disc is inserted, but it's only a single button click. And I though I read that there's an auto artwork plug-in out there? Haven't tried it. Like I said I don't care for auto art lookup. I prefer to google it and see the quality on a full screen before picking it. Or roll my own if I have to.

And yeah, the reason I asked about WMP being included in the conversation is that it's not what 'serious' ripping is about. It deserves to be compared to ripping with itunes, not the likes of EAC, db, Jriver, etc.
 
Last edited:
I'm not seeing much there that is all that different than EAC. Sure it's not automatic when I disc is inserted, but it's only a single button click. And I though I read that there's an auto artwork plug-in out there? Haven't tried it. Like I said I don't care for auto art lookup. I prefer to google it and see the quality on a full screen before picking it. Or roll my own if I have to.
To each his own. I don't obsess over cover art when dbPoweramp most often finds the highest resolution original content.

And find the batch transcoder very useful for providing content to my phone and car systems.
 
I have in the past based a lot of my bias towards cd quality playback over MP3 on what I have downloaded from Amazon and before that, iTunes. Amazon, when you buy a cd, you can download the MP3 version to listen to immediately. Those, for whatever reason sound not that good, some worse than others but none as good as the cd that comes in the mail.

However when I create a MP3 from the cd for use on my phone using JRiver, I have noticed considerable improvements over what I have found typical of lossy downloads which makes me wonder about the source. Since subscribing to standard (lossy) Tidal I have been pretty satisfied with the Sq on it. I run that music through my older model Modi from my pc while all my stored lossless is through the quiet Raspberry Pi and the new modi multibit DAC which to my ear is a much better DAC so it probably isn't a fair comparison. Maybe when I get back home I will run Tidal through the multibit for a while and listen to some familiar tunes.

As for psycho acoustics, I really don't know what to say at this point. I'm certain it happens, and I am not a big believer in the abx test or having friends over for listening sessions. I think you have to listen over a period of time to start to discern what is different, and then go back and listen to the other and whatnot. For me, at this point I'm more concerned about other parts of my vintage system but I think drive space being as cheap as it is, MP3's are not a consideration for me.
:beerchug:
 
To each his own. I don't obsess over cover art when dbPoweramp most often finds the highest resolution original content.

And find the batch transcoder very useful for providing content to my phone and car systems.
What's funny is a actually have a copy of db on my computer. I think I got it to do the batch conversion thing, but still haven't gotten to it, yet.
We use iPhones here, but itunes stopped working on this old computer. That, and my ipod classic seems like it conked out.

I should give it a go with ripping some day.
 
What's funny is a actually have a copy of db on my computer. I think I got it to do the batch conversion thing, but still haven't gotten to it, yet.
I've used it to create MP3s for my truck, MP4s for iTunes and WAV for burning CDRs. Easy to use whether you're converting a single track or an entire library of thousands.
 
I've used it to create MP3s for my truck, MP4s for iTunes and WAV for burning CDRs. Easy to use whether you're converting a single track or an entire library of thousands.
So, if I dump say 10 albums that are in folders (encoded in FLAC), do they come out the other end similar, but as MP3?
 
Effectively, but the actual process would be to first copy the folders to a new location. Then point the converter to the new location and choose the destination format. Tell it to save converted files in same folder. Then you delete original format versions in the new folders.

That will preserve the original folder structure if desired otherwise all converted files will end up in a single folder of your choosing.
 
Effectively, but the actual process would be to first copy the folders to a new location. Then point the converter to the new location and choose the destination format. Tell it to save converted files in same folder. Then you delete original format versions in the new folders.

That will preserve the original folder structure if desired otherwise all converted files will end up in a single folder of your choosing.
Cool, thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom