This guide is now becoming out of date, but should still give a very good start. I have not personally used EAC since some time mid-07. I now strongly suggest using dBpoweramp Reference. Note, EAC is free, dBpoweramp is not, plus to get the real benefits you need the better (ie more expensive package - Reference, not powerpack). However, dBpoweramp outperforms EAC in secure ripping on drives with C2 handling (basically most modern drives), being both faster and more reliable. In my experience dBpoweramp is also more stable than EAC. dBpoweramp is also being actively developed and updated. Spoon, its developer, is an active member here at HA. dBpoweramp is much easier to set up and configure,  and features the best meta-data system available - PerfectMeta! A guide is available dBpoweramp FLAC guide


First, install EAC V0.95,  Accurate Rip and configure with a key disk, and FLAC

EAC Options:

Extraction Tab
[X] Fill up missing offset samples with silence  *Optional. For drives that overread lead in/out  this is not needed.*
[ ] No use of null samples for CRC calculations  *Doesnt change audio*
[X] Synchronize between tracks
[ ] Delete leading and trailing silent blocks
[X] Skip track extraction on read or sync errors (wont affect rip, but I check yes for next 3)
[X] Skip track extraction after duration longer than X times realtime
[X] After each 30 minutes of extraction, cool down the drive for 5 mins
[X] Lock drive tray during extraction
Extraction and compression priority: Normal
Error recovery quality: Medium **this is a change from my previous recommendation. This will decrease the number of error bars from 5 to 3. I have never had a rip go past 3 bars (really usually only 2 at most) and have an error free rip. Save the time. Plus its easier on your drive.

General Tab
doesnt matter for ripping.

Tools Tab
[X] Retrieve UPC/ISRC codes in CUE sheet generation
[X] Use CD-Text information in CUE sheet generation
[ ] Create '.m3u' playlist on extraction - **user option
[X] Automatically write status report on extraction
[X] On extraction, start external compressors queued in the background [1] - **user option.
[X] Do not open external compressor window - **user option
[X] Submit drive features after detection
[ ] Activate beginner mode, disable all advanced features

Normalization Tab
NOT CHECKED!!!

Filename Tab
Naming Scheme: %A - %C - %N - %T (or as you prefer, check EAC's FAQ.txt)
Various Artists: %C - %N - %A - %T (see above)

Catalog Tab
Not important

Directories Tab
**user option.

Write Tab
Nothing to do with extraction here

Interface Tab
Not so important, you can use the Native one



Drive Options

Extraction Method Tab
Secure Mode (after "detect read features" option is used, with appropriate settings)
**It is also reasonable to use Burst Mode if you always use Shift-F6 (Test & Copy). It has been argued that this is more secure then secure mode and its tends to be faster. Burst mode alone (without Test & Copy) is not secure!
[X] Drive caches audio data (clears the drive cache)
[ ] Drive is capable of C2

Drive Tab
Autodetect for drive read command
[ ] Big endian
[ ] Swap channels
[X] Spin up before extraction

Offset / Speed Tab
Offset locked by AccurateRip
Overread into lead-in and lead-out data (You will need to test this one on a disc, if you get a read sync error on the first or last track of a new CD your drive cant overread and the option should be unchecked - this will mean that you loose the number of samples equal to your drive offeset on either the first or last song, the only solution is a different drive)
[X] Allow speed reduction during extraction
[X] CD-Text Read capable drive

Gap Detection Tab
Gap/Index retreval method: per drive setting (start with method A or B)
Detection Accuracy: Secure (some prefer to use accurate)


Compression Options

External Compression Tab
[X] Use external compression
User defined encoder
Use file extension: .flac
Program including path: -browse and select flac.exe-
Additional Command Line Options:
-6 -V -T "artist=%a" -T "title=%t" -T "album=%g" -T "date=%y" -T "tracknumber=%n" -T "genre=%m" -T comment="%e" -T "comment=EAC (Secure Mode)" %s
Bitrate: Doesn't matter
[X] Delete WAV after compression
[ ] Use CRC check
[ ] Add ID3 tag
[X] Check for external compression return code

Offset Tab
[ ] Use offset detection for encoding and decoding Do NOT check this as it will add gaps to gapless music

When ripping the tracks, I suggest using Shift-F6 (test & copy) to decrease the chance of having a bad rip go undetected. The CRCs should match for the T&C, if they don't there is a problem.

You may want to look for a drive that can overread into the lead in and lead out. You will need to get this feature to get 100% perfect copies of CDs, though you probably wont notice if you dont have it. A list of drive features can be found here:
DAE Drive Feature Database - look for green in the overread column. The smaller the read offset the better too.

Plextors are almost a universally good choice. I strongly suggest investing in a Plextor since you will be archiving your CD collection. Do it once and do it right. In addition, there is a switch available that works for most Plextor drives that disables the drives cache. This gives burst mode speeds (often >30x) in secure mode. Search the forum for the -USEFUA switch if you have a plextor drive.

Edit: Removed broken links.

About used commandline options:

Why -8? If we'll read comparison at http://flac.sourceforge.net/comparison.html, we can see that -8 gives 55min to compression VS 12min at -5, and win 2.5MB from 413MB total. Is here a sense?

Why -V? Isn't it paranoya?

Filename Tab
Naming Scheme: %N - %T
Various Artists: %C - %N - %A - %T

Why do you suggest to include the CD title with various artists albums & not with single artist albums?

About used commandline options:

Why -8? If we'll read comparison at http://flac.sourceforge.net/comparison.html, we can see that -8 gives 55min to compression VS 12min at -5, and win 2.5MB from 413MB total. Is here a sense?

I didn't see anywere on the flac page what speed cpu they were using to encode but on my 1.4 Ghz xp  it take usually only slightly more time to compress at -8 than to rip so seems like -8 makes sense.

encoding to -5 vs -8, on most modern computers will see little difference in encoding time. Plus encoding is a 1 time thing, so its my opinion that a little space savings is worth it. That being said, -5 is perfectly acceptable

First, install EAC V0.95, 
Directories Tab
%A/%C  - **user option. This will give you Aritist/Album file directories
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=268152"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Aritist
Thank you for this guide.

Because I'm working at time the flac is compressing. And i have not give any cpu_time for flac if isn't sense for this. About sense I've said: 55min vs 12min, when 411MB vs 413 MB differense.

2_PachmanP
http://flac.sourceforge.net/comparison.html, that's here. I don'n know how to refer into middle of page, so find himself:
In the table with upper words "Here are the summary results for all codecs and all modes:", where column headers are "codec", "encode time", ''Decode time", "Compressed size", etc.
Here see two rows:
flac 1.1.1 (-8)   55:02.38   7:07.59   411.88 MB ...
flac 1.1.1 (-5, default)   12:54.19   7:08.80   413.46 MB ...

Filename Tab
Naming Scheme: %N - %T
Various Artists: %C - %N - %A - %T

Why do you suggest to include the CD title with various artists albums & not with single artist albums?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=268842"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Since I also suggested Artist/Album file directories, which dont apply with various artist disks[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=268961"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This would result in files named

TrackNumber-Title (for same artist albums)
CDTitle-TrackNumber-TrackTitle  (for various artists)

& are you suggesting various artist albums not have folders at all?

Still doesn’t make sense to me

First, install EAC V0.95, 
Directories Tab
%A/%C  - **user option. This will give you Aritist/Album file directories

The directories tab is obviously not meant for this, it’s meant for creating a standard extraction directory such as “EAC Rips”. Folder & file name constructions should be defined in the Filename tab.

Extraction Method Tab
[X] Drive has ''Accurate Stream' feature
[X] Drive caches audio data
[_] Drive is capable of retrieving C2 error infomation

If unsure, these are the drive features I would suggest, they are the most generic & safest.

oops, your right. Fixed

and drives, which don't have accurate stream ?


I have collected guides at www.high-quality.ch.vu = users' high quality Audio guides & tutorials for EAC exactaudiocopy, Musepack mpc & various Lossless formats like Flac, Wavepack, Monkey's Audio Ape.

I go there through the whole procedure of configuring drives.
and useful flac setting are there, too, though I need some time for a general update of the guides, but they offer high value of information, even now.

Meanwhile personally I switched from flac -V (default) -5 to flac -V -8 , just to have those bit extra compression.
I encode most of my music still at P3-800 MHz, flac -8 is "speedy" for encoding (about 3x realtime of the music playtime iirc).

I used some time wavpack 4.1 -h -m ,
then wavpack 4.1 -x -m ,
the wavpack -x mode (x = extra , h = high mode) sqeezes space whilst offering nearly same decoding speed like flac.
But unfortunately, wavpack 4.1 -x -m encodes only in 1x speed, realtime of the playtime music, on my system, the reason, why I went back to flac -8 for the moment.

(user)

and drives, which don't have accurate stream ?

Every modern drive supports accurate stream just have a look at one of the drive settings databases. Anyway if your drive jitters & you have accurate stream enabled you will receive an error from EAC.

(Eli)

Filename Tab
Naming Scheme: %A - %C - %N - %T
Various Artists: %C - %N - %A - %T

File names should be as short as possible & because there is no need for them I think you should remove the the spaces.

To be consistent with your scheme you should add “Various Artists“ or “VA“ as the artist name for various artist albums.

Filename Tab
Naming Scheme: %A-%C\%N-%T
Various Artists: Various Artists-%C\%N-%A-%T

would result in

Folder name = Artist-Album
File Name = TrackNumber-TrackTitle & TrackNumber-Artist-TrackTitle for various artists

the ideal naming scheme 

Folder name = Artist-Album
File Name = TrackNumber-TrackTitle & TrackNumber-Artist-TrackTitle for various artists

the ideal naming scheme 
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=269668"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well there are many different naming schemes, and I would argue that this is NOT the ideal, but its up to personal choice really.

I personally am divided between:

Artist/Album/# - Title

and

Artist/Album/Artist - Album - # - Title

The first option relies on the folder directory for part of the info (though all of it is stored in tags). The second option uses folders for easy navigation, but has all of the song info in the name so it can stand alone.

I personally am divided between:

Artist/Album/# - Title

and

Artist/Album/Artist - Album - # - Title

The first option relies on the folder directory for part of the info (though all of it is stored in tags). The second option uses folders for easy navigation, but has all of the song info in the name so it can stand alone.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=316987"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The only thing I've ever found with the second choice is if the title, artist, and album names are really long (mostly with Classical music with symphony names in the artist) is that the tracks cannot be recorded easily to DVDs because of filename length limitations. This is even with UDF style formatting, but is seldom a problem unless you are running checksum or parity applications.

-Cal

My ideal naming scheme :

Artist/(Year) Album/nn. Title.flac

-Martin.

I personally am divided between:

Artist/Album/# - Title

and

Artist/Album/Artist - Album - # - Title

The first option relies on the folder directory for part of the info (though all of it is stored in tags). The second option uses folders for easy navigation, but has all of the song info in the name so it can stand alone.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=316987"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The only thing I've ever found with the second choice is if the title, artist, and album names are really long (mostly with Classical music with symphony names in the artist) is that the tracks cannot be recorded easily to DVDs because of filename length limitations. This is even with UDF style formatting, but is seldom a problem unless you are running checksum or parity applications.

-Cal
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=317007"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Easily solved with a single FLAC image and cuesheet.

Easily solved with a single FLAC image and cuesheet.

A couple of reasons as to why i prefer multiple tracks(without Cue Sheet) over images :

When ripping to multiple tracks, then the gaps are also perfectly copied(exept the part after the first 2 seconds - if present, of the pregap before track one), they are just not marked, which only means that i will not see a negative countdown between the tracks on the CD players display if burned to disc...

Many often say that they prefer images over multiple tracks because that they only have 'one file'(or two - if the Cue Sheet isn't embedded). When i rip an album to multiple tracks, then i have 'one directory' which holds the album + the tracks inside...

When ripping an album in EAC and one track has a read/sync error, then i go back and re-rip that single track until it's error free(if possible). If i ripped to image + Cue Sheet, then i would have to re-rip the entire CD again untill error free...

-Martin.

Hi Martin,

very good summary, why I prefer ripping to single tracks, too, no huge image file.

May I copy your text, and implement(&reference to your nickname) it one day to www.High-Quality.ch.vu , if I find time for an update ?

[ ]Fill up missing offset samples with silence

shouldn't this be on? one could argue that samples that are zero don't matter anyway but i see it this way: the length of a track is information, too. by cutting some samples off you are modifying information that could otherwise easily be preserved.

edit: that is also the sentiment why i rip full images + cue as opposed to single tracks. track gaps are information. by throwing them away you throw away information.

thoughts?

[ ]Fill up missing offset samples with silence

I agree with TCM, I think this box should be CHECKED as well for the reasons listed.

In response to TCM's gap comment:

Rip full images + cue doesn't work with Test & Copy.

Track gap info can be retained by ripping with "gaps apppended to previous track" and creating a cue sheet with noncompliant mode. Append to previous track makes sense when thinking about how cd player and PC audio player would play the tracks.

The only downside with append to previous track is if the CD contained audio in the pregap before track 1, then it had no track to append to and the track is lost. Music hidden in track 1 pregap would have to be found on a CD player by starting track 1 and rewinding to hear it. To rip it I would use rip by Index for track 1 only and delete track 1 and save track 1 pregap (which i rename to track 0)

A good track 1 pregap solution for EAC was suggested here:
http://www.digital-inn.de/showthread.php?t=28892
6th post down

Maybe Andre will implement the suggestion if enough people desire it?

In response to TCM's gap comment:

Rip full images + cue doesn't work with Test & Copy.

i can and do easily overcome this by just doing the whole process twice. after all, you get a checksum displayed at the end for full images, too.

[ ]Fill up missing offset samples with silence

shouldn't this be on? one could argue that samples that are zero don't matter anyway but i see it this way: the length of a track is information, too. by cutting some samples off you are modifying information that could otherwise easily be preserved.

edit: that is also the sentiment why i rip full images + cue as opposed to single tracks. track gaps are information. by throwing them away you throw away information.

thoughts?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=317873"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have a related question regarding “Fill up missing offset samples with silence” in EAC.  I too am ripping to FLAC using EAC ( I am ripping individual tracks, not images with cue sheets).  I have a Plextor Premium (external USB model) with the offset configured using AccurateRip.  I have ripped about 40 CD’s so far and I think everything is going fine.  The EAC report always shows “No Errors Occurred.”  The AccurateRip results vary against the database…it most cases I get all tracks accurately ripped although in some cases I get a message indicating that my CD is most likely a different pressing than the one stored in the database.

I have alternated using “Fill up missing offset samples with silence” and I don’t see a difference in either the EAC or the AccurateRip results.  Given that I am using the Plextor Premium (which supports over-ride into lead-in and lead-out…which I do have selected in EAC), is it safe to assume that I am getting rips with no missing samples; thus making the missing offset samples with silence selection irrelevant.  Is there any way for me to verify (beyond what I am already doing) that I am getting a bit for bit perfect copy?  Thanks in advance for your help.

[ ]Fill up missing offset samples with silence

shouldn't this be on? one could argue that samples that are zero don't matter anyway but i see it this way: the length of a track is information, too. by cutting some samples off you are modifying information that could otherwise easily be preserved.

edit: that is also the sentiment why i rip full images + cue as opposed to single tracks. track gaps are information. by throwing them away you throw away information.

thoughts?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=317873"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have a related question regarding “Fill up missing offset samples with silence” in EAC.  I too am ripping to FLAC using EAC ( I am ripping individual tracks, not images with cue sheets).  I have a Plextor Premium (external USB model) with the offset configured using AccurateRip.  I have ripped about 40 CD’s so far and I think everything is going fine.  The EAC report always shows “No Errors Occurred.”  The AccurateRip results vary against the database…it most cases I get all tracks accurately ripped although in some cases I get a message indicating that my CD is most likely a different pressing than the one stored in the database.

I have alternated using “Fill up missing offset samples with silence” and I don’t see a difference in either the EAC or the AccurateRip results.  Given that I am using the Plextor Premium (which supports over-ride into lead-in and lead-out…which I do have selected in EAC), is it safe to assume that I am getting rips with no missing samples; thus making the missing offset samples with silence selection irrelevant.  Is there any way for me to verify (beyond what I am already doing) that I am getting a bit for bit perfect copy?  Thanks in advance for your help.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=317907"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Correct. If you have a drive that over reads, you don't have any missing samples to fill up with silence. The option doesn't have any effect in that case.

[ ]Fill up missing offset samples with silence

shouldn't this be on? one could argue that samples that are zero don't matter anyway but i see it this way: the length of a track is information, too. by cutting some samples off you are modifying information that could otherwise easily be preserved.

edit: that is also the sentiment why i rip full images + cue as opposed to single tracks. track gaps are information. by throwing them away you throw away information.

thoughts?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=317873"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have a related question regarding “Fill up missing offset samples with silence” in EAC.  I too am ripping to FLAC using EAC ( I am ripping individual tracks, not images with cue sheets).  I have a Plextor Premium (external USB model) with the offset configured using AccurateRip.  I have ripped about 40 CD’s so far and I think everything is going fine.  The EAC report always shows “No Errors Occurred.”  The AccurateRip results vary against the database…it most cases I get all tracks accurately ripped although in some cases I get a message indicating that my CD is most likely a different pressing than the one stored in the database.

I have alternated using “Fill up missing offset samples with silence” and I don’t see a difference in either the EAC or the AccurateRip results.  Given that I am using the Plextor Premium (which supports over-ride into lead-in and lead-out…which I do have selected in EAC), is it safe to assume that I am getting rips with no missing samples; thus making the missing offset samples with silence selection irrelevant.  Is there any way for me to verify (beyond what I am already doing) that I am getting a bit for bit perfect copy?  Thanks in advance for your help.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=317907"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Correct. If you have a drive that over reads, you don't have any missing samples to fill up with silence. The option doesn't have any effect in that case.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=317910"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for the response.  Should I be doing something else to verify my rips to make sure that they are perfect bit for bit copies?

Thanks for the response.  Should I be doing something else to verify my rips to make sure that they are perfect bit for bit copies?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=317911"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]

Matching CRCs with EAC's Test & Copy function in Burst or Secure is about as good as you will get at this point. Even better if that matches with AccurateRip results which says you got the same thing as someone else. You aren't really going to get bit for bit copies unless you address a whole lot of other issues like whether or not the beginning of the CD are null samples, whether you can overwrite in those cases, whether you have detected and handled CD-TEXT, ISRC codes, etc., etc. Be glad you get identical audio data and leave it at that 

Should I be doing something else to verify my rips to make sure that they are perfect bit for bit copies?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=317911"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Test & Copy? The fact that accurate stream can result in different CRC's kind of worries me. Doing Test & Copy makes it a little bit more secure, but there is a chance that T&C passes and its still not a 100% bit for bit copy.

One time I had a problematic track on a scratched cd. I reripped it numerous times w/T&C, and I had matching T&C CRC's occur twice out of about 6 to 10 tries. The two sets of matching T&C CRC's were different.... I didn't truly trust EAC had ripped it ok.

For example:

Track 6:
Test CRC: Blah123
Copy CRC: Blah123

and ripping again until they both match...

Track 6:
Test CRC: Doh!456
Copy CRC: Doh!456

Uh oh, they match each other, but not if I rip multiple times!

Test & Copy seems to be useful because it can give you a heads up that the track might be suspicious.

Problably the best way would be to rip (which you are doing already, lmpine) with an offset corrected drive with EAC in secure mode (accurate rip enabled) and compare your hashes to the database of ripped cd's. Keep in mind the 1st and last track may have different hashes because of a drive's inability to overread into lead in/lead out.