Skip to main content

Poll

What's your *main lossy* format of choice?

  • MP3
    501 (54.2%)
  • Ogg Vorbis
    211 (22.8%)
  • AAC
    118 (12.8%)
  • MPC
    41 (4.4%)
  • WMA Standard
    5 (0.5%)
  • WMA Pro
    3 (0.3%)
  • Atrac (any version)
    4 (0.4%)
  • Other / I don't use lossy AT ALL!
    41 (4.4%)

Total Members Voted: 1025

Topic: 2007 ripping/encoding general poll (Read 130522 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • Jebus
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #25
Right now I have FLAC backups of all my discs, and i transcode that to AAC for my iPod, and MP3 for streaming to my XBOX 360... would like to get rid of the AAC and/or the MP3, but I haven't figured out how to tag iPod-compatible album art in MP3, and althought the XBOX will play back AAC files, it won't read them streamed over the network for some reason (only local or off an iPod). Oh well!

  • Synthetic Soul
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #26
With the agreement of Synthetic Soul, I started a new bunch of polls.
This started with a discussion in the 2006 lossless poll.  guruboolez and I agree that a fixed term poll, preferably with a short duration (3 or 6 months in my opinion), will provide a more accurate representation of users' preferences.

The current TAK situation is a good example:  If the majority of voters vote before TAK is released, and then many start using it, if the poll is left open for a year or more (2005's was open for twenty months) the poll will not accurately reflect usage for 2007.  If two or four polls are taken in that time the migration is well documented.

The idea to join the two is a good one; I think the number of votes already reflects that.  I agree with one poster that perhaps "I don't use any" should be a separate option so all such votes to that question can be "discounted".  I could add the option now if you want guruboolez, but it should probably wait until the next one, considering the number of votes already.

I told guruboolez that I would be interested in the image vs tracks question, but I'm afraid that the votes are being polluted by users that only rip to lossy.  I mean, 99% of people use tracks for listening, we're more interested in your archive/lossless version.  Maybe only people who use lossless should answer the question, and an option added for a null vote?

For my part I use LAME -V5 --vbr-new for general playing (car stereo, Nano Plus, PC) and WavPack image with cuesheet for my archive.  I use EAC with REACT to rip, and foobar2000 to play and manage my files.

Good work guruboolez, and kudos for geting this so close to the start of the year!
I'm on a horse.

  • Zurman
  • [*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #27
Lossy: MP3 (lame 128kbps CBR) because of its soft and hard compatibility, and great quality with lame

Lossless: Monkey (3.99 high) because of its excellent compression. I do not mind its poor compatibility since I only use my PC and foobar for lossless. I think I'll switch to wavpack 1 day though...

Ripping: 1 track per file, using EAC because it's the best one
  • Last Edit: 02 January, 2007, 04:26:00 AM by Zurman

2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #28
- AAC because my phone-DAP handles it : the "compression rate/quality" ratio of HE-AAC is simply amazing.
-FLAC for lossless, but I rarely use it.

  • Kirby54925
  • [*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #29
Lossy:  MP3 -V 2 --vbr-new for my laptop, -V 5 --vbr-new for my 4G iPod just because MP3 is so ubiquitous in the digital world.

Lossless:  Wavpack -hmx because it has one of the highest compression rates I've seen for my lossless collection.

Ripping:  1 file per disc (image+cuesheet) using EAC+REACT because it produces the smallest file size possible for a particular album (ripping to individual tracks introduces overhead for each of the tracks).  Only thing I don't like about image+cuesheet is that AccurateRip doesn't work in verifying the rip, which is pretty depressing.

2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #30
I use lame -V5 for portable use with my ipod nano and flac for archiving.
I rip with EAC (mareo)

  • LANjackal
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #31
I think my signature pretty much says it all when it comes to my personal ripping policies.

For actual playback/library I use WMA and MP3

For archiving I use MAC
EAC>1)fb2k>LAME3.99 -V 0 --vbr-new>WMP12 2)MAC-Extra High

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #32
I agree with one poster that perhaps "I don't use any" should be a separate option so all such votes to that question can be "discounted".  I could add the option now if you want guruboolez, but it should probably wait until the next one, considering the number of votes already.

As you wish. I guess that will reset the poll but revoting shouldn't be too hard
I already had the possibility to split the last aswer (10 answers are allowed) but I hesitated and finally merged both into a single one. I originally tried to avoid or limit 'ghost' answers - you know, all answers that only end with 1 or 2‰ of voters and which can't therefore be considered as totally useless. My choice seems to be valid but only for the lossy part; for lossless it seems that an important part of voters don't use lossless - hence the 10% after 160 votes. The poll is only 12 hours old; voting a second time is just a matter of few seconds so I guess it shouldn't be annoying for most people to vote again. Editing the title (provisionally) could be worth :
2007 ripping/encoding poll [UPDATED 02/01/07: VOTE AGAIN] or something like that.

What do you think?

And if you see something else to change (poor wording, etc...) especially on the thirs poll: don't hesitate.

  • Last Edit: 02 January, 2007, 06:43:02 AM by guruboolez

  • psycho
  • [*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #33
MP3 - because of hardware compatibility and because LAME exists. Otherwise I would use OGG Vorbis.
Monkey's Audio - because I use it only for archiving, so compression ratio is what's important to me, not decoding speed.
One file per track - mostly, because gapless ain't a problem on PC.
One file per disc - rarely, because some albums are not listenable with gaps and my car mp3 stereo can't playback mp3s gapless.

I use EAC. Before that I was using CDex and way before that Audiograbber.
lame -V 0

  • sketchy_c
  • [*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #34
lossy: MP3 (rip with EAC into LAME -V2 --vbr-new)

lossless: Apple Lossless due to iPod/iTunes compatibility.  Will look at FLAC if I ever go the Rockbox way.  In either case, my use of this is very limited (subliminal/binaural audio).

rip method: One file per track.  Much more conducive for mix-maxing and general silliness with MusicIP.
  • Last Edit: 02 January, 2007, 08:13:51 AM by sketchy_c

  • MedO
  • [*][*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #35
2007 ripping/encoding poll [UPDATED 02/01/07: VOTE AGAIN] or something like that.

What do you think?


I don't mind voting again, and I'd be very interested to see how many people, like me, migrated from EAC to DbPowerAmp's CD Ripper.

  • bhoar
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #36
I don't mind voting again, and I'd be very interested to see how many people, like me, migrated from EAC to DbPowerAmp's CD Ripper.


It seems a little unfair to gauge the move at this point in time considering the release is so close.  I'm personally waiting for the release R12 to purchase it and, even then, may only use it on tough discs, due to lack of Image Rip.

Until then, I am sticking with EAC.

-brendan
Hacking CD Robots & Autoloaders: http://hyperdiscs.pbwiki.com/

  • Synthetic Soul
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #37
I agree with one poster that perhaps "I don't use any" should be a separate option so all such votes to that question can be "discounted".  I could add the option now if you want guruboolez, but it should probably wait until the next one, considering the number of votes already.
As you wish. I guess that will reset the poll but revoting shouldn't be too hard 
...
What do you think?

And if you see something else to change (poor wording, etc...) especially on the thirs poll: don't hesitate.
Personally I think it should be left as is for now.  It's not a major deal; it was more a suggestion for future polls really.  I wouldn't edit your poll without first consulting you, as it seems a little intrusive, or arrogant.  Your English may not be perfect, but neither is mine (as foosion knows ).  I think the poll should continue as it stands, it works well.
I'm on a horse.

  • Squeller
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #38
mp3 and wavpack. But if I can afford, nero aac for lossy.
For ripping: I'm using foobar2000 more and more...
  • Last Edit: 02 January, 2007, 10:50:24 AM by Squeller

  • jcoalson
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #39
And if I used lossless I would probably be using Flac, but because I don't want to re-rip all my music, and because it doesn't enjoy hardware support I probably won't be using it for a while.
http://flac.sourceforge.net/links.html#hardware

  • evereux
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #40
I don't mind voting again, and I'd be very interested to see how many people, like me, migrated from EAC to DbPowerAmp's CD Ripper.


It seems a little unfair to gauge the move at this point in time considering the release is so close.

I agree, we should wait until the final release. People are at this moment using free versions for testing. If they're crippled (no more accuraterip db access) when it goes final or the cost is too much people may well switch back to EAC.

MP3 and Wavpack for me.
daefeatures.co.uk

  • smack
  • [*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #41
lossy=MPC, lossless=LA
I have been using this combination of codecs for several years now. It works, so there's no reason to switch.

  • ExUser
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Read-only
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #42
Lossy: AAC. Only for my podcast.
Lossless: WavPack, if I'm encoding. If I come across some other lossless format, I'll keep it as is unless foobar2000 doesn't support it.

I dropped Musepack about a month ago. No particular reason; I just figured I'd switch over to lossless as my primary format. If I could, I'd rather use Musepack than AAC for podcasting.

I will only ever rip to one-track-per-file until someone puts out a one-album-per-file or one-disc-per-file solution that is as elegant. None of them are there yet. Matroska could clean house here, but no one bothers to put the work into the foobar2000 side of things to make it work well.
  • Last Edit: 02 January, 2007, 04:54:14 PM by Canar

2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #43
I have decided to start working on having a lossless backup of all my music, so I can easily update my collection as improvements are made to various encoders.

So the plan so far for 2007 I believe I am going to do this.

Lossless - FLAC files (1 file per album, with cuesheet and replaygain)
Lossy - MP3's (LAME 3.97 at either - V 2 --vbr-new or - V 3 -vbr-new), one track per song

Ripper - Max (http://sbooth.org/)
Player - iTunes 7 on OS X
iTunes 10 - Mac OS X 10.6
256kbps AAC VBR
iPhone 4 32GB

  • leokennis
  • [*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #44
LAME MP3 V0...MP3 because it's universal, and V0 because to me it seems like a good tradeoff between quality and size...it's not that I could hear the difference between V5 and V0, but if you have the luxury (read: disk capacity) to easily suit your entire collection in V0, why go for less?

IMHO
Les mots d'amour...

  • 56Nomad
  • [*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #45
I'm primarily an MP3 guy with a few APE and FLAC files here and there. I had to grin at the results for ATRAC. I received a Sony Network Walkman as a gift and I messed around a bit with that nasty Sony SonicStage app and ripped a few ATRACs. Have to admit, they sound good, but nobody else supports it.

I have two portable players that I just about never use. My question would be this:
When/where do you use your portable?

I listen to my stereo at home unless I'm on my PC and then I use that. I listen to my car stereo in the car. I can't wear the thing at work. It's not exactly sociable to sit with other people and wear earbuds while you nod your head and play air guitar.

My other one is an older RCA Lyra with a 20 GB drive. I use it more for file transfer than I ever use it to play music or look at pictures or videos. I often wonder when/where all these bazillion iPods get used...

  • drbeachboy
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #46
I use EAC-REACT to rip to: Lossless=FLAC -5 and Lossy=AAC ~190 VBR

Since I use foobar2000 exclusively, I use FLAC-images+cuesheet for archiving and for playing on my home computer. AAC is strictly for my iPod. I normally use Nero, but I use iTunes for albums with gapless playback. Though, gapless playback is always a sticky proposition for me with my 3G iPod. Some play as expected, while others still have a tiny bit of silence between tracks.
Surf's Up!
"Columnated Ruins Domino"

  • audiomars
  • [*][*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #47
My choices:

Lossy format: MP3
Lossless format: WavPack. I love the speed while decoding and transcoding. Not concerned about hardware support as I use them exclusively on my PC with foobar2000 feeding an amp from LINE OUT on my soundcard.
Ripping: EAC rip to one-track-per-file. Somehow I am not too fond of single large files with CUE sheets, embedded or otherwise.
Reason is immortal, all else mortal
- Pythagoras

  • Kirby54925
  • [*][*]
2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #48
Hmmm... based on the results, it looks like the people have spoken:  one file per track seems to be the norm here at HA.  Now I feel torn as to whether I should revert back to that method or stay the course with image+cuesheet.

A small debate regarding the issue can be found here.

EDIT: 
I told guruboolez that I would be interested in the image vs tracks question, but I'm afraid that the votes are being polluted by users that only rip to lossy.  I mean, 99% of people use tracks for listening, we're more interested in your archive/lossless version.  Maybe only people who use lossless should answer the question, and an option added for a null vote?


Perhaps a new poll is in order?  I would think that would be a good idea.
  • Last Edit: 03 January, 2007, 05:10:06 AM by Kirby54925

2007 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #49
Another disambiguation suggestion: the "it depends, I mix both" option covers people who do this randomly (experimentally perhaps) and those who have a set policy, for example ripping lossy per-track and losslessly per-disc. I'm not sure how you'd change the questions to split the two, but it might be interesting to do that especially if we were looking for trends that develop.
Anyway, not a biggie.

Another suggestion given some of the feedback: add a "I can't make up my mind!!!" answer for each question. Those would've been the correct answers for me up until about 6 months ago...