Windows media player for ripping?

[mrmike]

I am in the process of ripping my cd collection to a 3tb Fathom external hard drive. I have been ripping with windows media player using wave lossless set to best quality. I will be playing the files on a Marantz UD7007 blueray/multi disc player with usb input so no PC involved at this point but that could change someday.

 

Should I be using something other than windows to rip? I'm about 75 discs in with about 600 to go.

[audiotone]

EAC...exact audio copy...free software...

[mrmike]

I used to use EAC when I was on XP but now on windows 7/10 I started using WMP and itunes. I have another hard drive from a second desktop system that has EAC rips but what I did not like was no track names or album art so maybe I was doing something wrong. Is that the main advantage of EAC error correction?

[master]

Is that the main advantage of EAC error correction?

 

EAC checks with AccurateRip and verifies that your rip is correct.

 

You'd want to use EAC or any other ripper that verifies the rips with AccurateRip.

[audiventory]

I assume, proper CD ripper provide enought accuracy without any external database that filled from uncertified sources.

 

What warranty that decission based on the database content from random sources is correct?

 

And what about rare CDs?

[jhwalker]

I assume, proper CD ripper provide enought accuracy without any external database that filled from uncertified sources.

 

What warranty that decission based on the database content from random sources is correct?

 

And what about rare CDs?

 

Yuri, you've mentioned your concern about the rip database several times, but you fail to acknowledge the facts that if you get a *single* match against the database, the odds are millions (billions?) to one you have an accurate rip. If there are multiple matches, it is certain, no possibility of doubt.

 

It matters not where the data comes from.

[audiventory]

Yuri, you've mentioned your concern about the rip database several times, but you fail to acknowledge the facts that if you get a *single* match against the database, the odds are millions (billions?) to one you have an accurate rip. If there are multiple matches, it is certain, no possibility of doubt.

 

It matters not where the data comes from.

 

Hi John,

 

What about 50% vs. 50% kind of checksums?

 

Or 40%, 20%, 10%, 5%? What checksum right here?

 

Why we should suppose that 40% was ripped without errors for unknown sources?

 

*single* match is not single if use all available abilities.

 

There are multiple reading, cash avoiding, direct error readings (I suppose it available now for almost all of modern CD drives), statistical processing.

 

It also statistical processing but under deep control of errors direct from CD.

 

I suppose, very low probability of fully identical reading several times from damaged CD. If it performed properly, of course.

 

May be identical re-reading can be met. I think, some mechanical instability during reading should cause different result if CD on edge of correct reading.

 

Also direct control during ripping give us more opportunities for restoring CD’s content.

 

Especially it is important for rare CDs.

[mrmike]

I had no idea that EAC verifies your data from an outside database. Not that that's a huge deal but I wonder how inaccurate my RIP from WMP could possibly be? I have not encountered any problems playing anything so far. Most of my cds were purchased new and are in excellent condition.

 

If a different program was easier to catalog or provided something else extra like maybe liner notes, I would be more interested in that.

[davide256]

I abandoned EAC years ago as archaic. DBPoweramp is much better, allows you freedom of choice for audio file save type and lossy/lossless option. Zero trust factor in WMP

[mrmike]

Zero trust factor in WMP

 

What do you not trust about WMP Dave?

[davide256]

WMP is like Itunes... it tries to force you down the vendors preferred path for rip media type and tagging development. Another "Internet on training wheels" application. I do like that both EAC and DBPoweramp provide CRC verification of whether your rip matches checksum for known good rip of same cd/track... don't get that with WMP or iTunes.

[davide256]

WMP is like Itunes... it tries to force you down the vendors preferred path for rip media type and tagging development. Another "Internet on training wheels" application. I do like that both EAC and DBPoweramp provide CRC verification of whether your rip matches checksum for known good rip of same cd/track... don't get that with WMP or iTunes.

 

Also note that with DBPoweramp it goes against 4 meta data databases... its rare that you can't get disc and track information for a rip. Compilations and altered re-releases occasionally cause hiccups.

[mrmike]

That's good to know. Thanks for the info. Dbpoweramp sounds like the best solution.

[DMM]

dbPoweramp is probably the best solution (C2 pointers in the re-reading, multiple databases...)

 

If you prefer a free option, try CueRipper (also handles pointers C2, check with AR and CTDB, excellent databases -not much as dBp-) Their only "limitations": just rips entire CD (in single tracks of course) and does not allow overreading (something relative: must support the unit, and modern drives do not support it).

Advantage: you can even repair rips with errors (if it is a popular CD with entries in AR and CTDB)

 

Sorry for my english

[audiventory]

is probably the best solution (C2 pointers in the re-reading

 

I want add that there are no one CD ripper can do it. Including open source, as far as I know.

 

Result (error detection) depend on implementation.

 

In our CD ripper (AuI ConverteR) we use, as example:

 

1. Raw binary reading from CD.

 

2. CD builtin error control (each byte of raw audio stream under control) what sometimes named as C2

 

3. Re-reading with trying to empty cache as system as builtin CD. Trying sign that there may be cach that don't allow be turned off. But AuI's reading algorithms try avoid such caches even.

 

4. Statistical processing all complex of information extracted from CD.

 

It allow detect errors and try to restore original information.

 

As result AuI ConverteR show results of ripping:

 

a) Fatal errors number (what it can't restore)

 

b) Probably restored bytes number

 

This algorithm currently work under Mac OS X. And soon we will replace current CD ripper under Windows.

 

AuI's ripper under Windows currently able to re-read and designed for work with damaged CDs. But new algorithm give us more possibilities for control under ripping and for releasing of new ideas what we have and continue research currently.

 

For testing used as manufactured by third party audio CDs as own produced test CDs with different degree of damaging.

 

Own produced test CDs have such advantage as known binary content for better control of CD ripping quality.

 

Always possibly exactly compare content of ripped lossless files (WAV, FLAC, AIFF) with original binary data.

 

 

Resume:

 

Complex processing (CD's raw binary audio data and error markers) give opportunity to try check audio binary data integrity by different ways.

 

For me direct access to raw binary audio data and error markers from CD give widest oppotunities for error detecting. Even without some external services.

 

Besides simple detecting of possible error in ripped file, direct access to CD data give opportunity to fix the error during ripping.

 

It is especially actually for enough rare CDs.

[DMM]

 

1. Raw binary reading from CD.

 

2. CD builtin error control (each byte of raw audio stream under control) what sometimes named as C2

 

3. Re-reading with trying to empty cache as system as builtin CD. Trying sign that there may be cach that don't allow be turned off. But AuI's reading algorithms try avoid such caches even.

 

4. Statistical processing all complex of information extracted from CD.

 

It allow detect errors and try to restore original information.

 

[...]

 

Right. Something like this makes Cuetools.

 

What happens is that you should always trust the quality of the reading unit

 

The software does not read the CD, only tells the drive what to do by sending specific SCSI read command. The drive internally processes and sends the result to the software (p.e: If the unit does not deliver correctly C2 pointers, you can not know if the reading was correct; neither the unit nor the software can judge whether the pointers are correct) The quality of the drive is the most important, followed by software that can send proper commands to the drive and can correctly interpret the returned data (and processed) for the drive...

 

The value of databases as AccurateRip and CTDB is that it is very unlikely that different units with different chipsets give false errors (or false hits) in the same places on different physical CDs (damaged in the same places!!)

 

In the case of rare CDs, it is safest to have two different units with different chipset and rip them both. If the CRC agree (hence the practical value of the offset correction) most likely the rip is correct. Thus, we do not rely blindly on the "good process" of a single unit and its chipset.

 

Sorry for my english

[audiventory]

What happens is that you should always trust the quality of the reading unit

 

The software does not read the CD, only tells the drive what to do by sending specific SCSI read command. The drive internally processes and sends the result to the software (p.e: If the unit does not deliver correctly C2 pointers, you can not know if the reading was correct; neither the unit nor the software can judge whether the pointers are correct) The quality of the drive is the most important, followed by software that can send proper commands to the drive and can correctly interpret the returned data (and processed) for the drive...

 

Yes. Calculation of CD’s error markers C2 out our control.

 

For better insurance used low level re-reading with cache «killing».

 

The value of databases as AccurateRip and CTDB is that it is very unlikely that different units with different chipsets give false errors (or false hits) in the same places on different physical CDs (damaged in the same places!!)

 

In the case of rare CDs, it is safest to have two different units with different chipset and rip them both. If the CRC agree (hence the practical value of the offset correction) most likely the rip is correct. Thus, we do not rely blindly on the "good process" of a single unit and its chipset.

 

Of course, possibly add any extra checking or re-rip on other drive.

 

Low probability that damaged sector will re-readed absolutely identically several time.

I can’t give checked numbers due while have not big test number.

I suppose, due optical and mechanical factors.

 

If don’t avoid caching, reading will repeatable and will impossibly detect correctly reader or not.

 

Currently, I suppose, that enough safe ripping (what I described in previous post) for detecting CD error. Even there present while unresearched (as minimum for us) opportunities for error detection and correction.

 

Of course, we make permanent researches for discovering possible issues in CD error detection. May be with time something changed in our position with appearing new information.

[DMM]

100% agreement... But for clarity:

 

Just note that reading is performed by the unit and its chipset (which always "processed" data in the first instance; the software has no direct access to the output of the photodiode; only access to the raw data obtained (and processed) by the chipset; the most the drive can do is give pointers C2 indicating if there is a corrupt byte.

 

Secure rippers prevent caching (Windows media is not one of them) for the unit to read directly from the CD, but there are many units that are not cached audio (or audio that caching is less than bursts that the software request...) In these units you do not need to defeat the cache.

 

Sorry for my english

[whoozwah]

I used dbpoweramp to rip my collection a few years back. had no problem with meta-tags. The software is not free but is very useful. I like that it adds context menu items to the shell so you can right-click files and edit the meta-data within windows w/o needing to go into your music management software first. That was a nice-to-have feature after you're finished with the main push of ripping all your stuff.

[mrmike]

I know this forum is suppose to be about the technical ins and outs of ripping and storage but most of this is above my understanding. All I really care about is how my rip sounds compared to the original. Assuming my WMP rips and plays without any trouble is there any difference in the quality of sound compared to the more sophisticated rippers?

[audiventory]

It is not transparency sound matter, but clicks, interruptings and other.

 

In most cases "simple" ripper will work fine. "Tough" CDs enought rare case.

 

However, if you rip big library, better way found (as soon as possibly) 1 unsuccessfully ripped CD between big total number of ripped CDs.

 

If you found "bad ripped" CD, you can use "sophisticated" ripper that allow try recover information.