Skip to main content

Topic: Need FLAC ripping advice (Read 7653 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • marvel
  • [*]
Need FLAC ripping advice
Hi folks,

Years ago I ripped my entire CD collection to high bitrate VBR MP3 using EAC. These days drive space is dirt cheap and I have Squeezeboxes connected to some decent audio equipment, so I want to re-rip my entire collection to FLAC in hopes that I'll never need to rip these CDs again (lossless is lossless, right? So I can re-encode to anything else at will without pulling the CDs out of storage again?). I'm looking for some basic information:

1. A link to a good guide for EAC to FLAC ripping to help me get the various settings right.

2. I want to know more about ripping an entire album to a single file. I didn't even know this was possible until literally 5 minutes ago. How does this work? It sounds ideal but I still have some concerns, mainly:

2a: Can my Squeezeboxes see and play individual tracks this way?
2b: Can I drag & drop individual tracks into a program like Nero for making custom CDs?
2c: What other possibilities does this open up? Embedded album art, id3 tags, ??
2d: Other pros / cons to this method vs. individual tracks?

I thank you in advance for your responses to these generic newbie questions.
  • Last Edit: 18 October, 2008, 07:26:30 PM by marvel

  • twostar
  • [*][*][*][*]
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #1
A good EAC and flac guide here.

  • HotshotGG
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #2
Quote
1. A link to a good guide for EAC to FLAC ripping to help me get the various settings right.

2. I want to know more about ripping an entire album to a single file. I didn't even know this was possible until literally 5 minutes ago. How does this work? It sounds ideal but I still have some concerns, mainly:

2c: What other possibilities does this open up? Embedded album art, id3 tags, ??
2d: Other pros / cons to this method vs. individual tracks?


Check out the EAC Lossless Backup wiki page and also check out this wiki page:

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=EAC_and_FLAC

To answer your second question you can rip to a single file use a CUE sheet to index it and even embed your album art in it, but that seems like quite a handful. FLAC uses Vorbis comment tags it does not use ID3 tags. Rohangc in the post below suggested in the past the only reason to do this would be in case of corruption in the archive or bad data with individual track's. I personally don't see any reason to do this unless of course it's something like DJ set where there is a continous stream of music.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=59345
  • Last Edit: 19 October, 2008, 02:57:21 AM by HotshotGG
College student/IT Assistant

  • Synthetic Soul
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #3
2. I want to know more about ripping an entire album to a single file. I didn't even know this was possible until literally 5 minutes ago. How does this work? It sounds ideal but I still have some concerns
I rip to single file (often called an 'image' here).  EAC creates an image with an accompanying cue sheet.  The image holds all the audio information, while the cue sheet records the meta data (artist, titles, etc.) and the track index points (where tracks start).

2b: Can I drag & drop individual tracks into a program like Nero for making custom CDs?
I don't think so.  This method is purely for burning an exact replica of the whole CD.  You can play individual files in supporting players like foobar.  foobar would also let you extract a track to a single file to burn in Nero.  You may be able to create a mix and burn it in foobar, using its cue sheet reading ability and burning component together (so that may acually be a 'yes').

2c: What other possibilities does this open up? Embedded album art, id3 tags, ??
You can embed album art and tag the image.  Of course, you can do this with tracks also.

2d: Other pros / cons to this method vs. individual tracks?
Take a look at one of my older posts.

Pros:
  • You do not need to consider gaps
  • You do not need to worry about HTOA tracks (if your drive can rip them)
  • If you embed the cue sheet in a tag you only need to worry about one file.
Cons:
  • Not as flexible as separate tracks
  • Limited number of burners and players
I use images for my lossless copy, as it is easier to archive, and will back-up the disc more easily.  However, I use tracks for my lossy MP3 collection, as they are more flexible and far better supported.

Edit: Wow, how long did I take writing that post, I must have fallen asleep part way through. HotshotGG's link is even better.
  • Last Edit: 19 October, 2008, 03:22:57 AM by Synthetic Soul
I'm on a horse.

  • marvel
  • [*]
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #4
Excellent!! Thank you very much for the replies. This is exactly what I was looking for. I've decided to stick to individual files. I played with the single file a bit and like the idea, but it's just too non-compliant. I can't drag & drop individual tracks into players, or Nero, etc, filename searches won't turn up individual tracks, and so on and so forth. Too many downsides for me. I'm not paranoid enough about my CD backups that I need an image file; I can burn all of the FLAC files in the correct order and have a "perfect" CD back (OK, track gaps might not be identical, but I just care about the songs...).

Again, I appreciate the responses and links. I didn't realize there was a wiki here, I'll make good use of it from now on.

  • JJZolx
  • [*][*][*][*]
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #5
I'm not paranoid enough about my CD backups that I need an image file; I can burn all of the FLAC files in the correct order and have a "perfect" CD back (OK, track gaps might not be identical, but I just care about the songs...).


One additional recommendation: Whenever you rip a CD to multiple Flac files using EAC, take a moment to also generate a non-compliant CUE sheet (this is the default CUE sheet type that EAC creates).  Then, to create a nearly identical copy of the CD you can use a little program called Burrrn just by double-clicking the CUE sheet file.

http://www.burrrn.net/?page_id=4

Makes duping CDs very simple and your gaps will be identical to the original.  The one thing Burrrn doesn't do is use adjust for a drive offset when burning the disc, but it doesn't sounds like that would be an issue for you.

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #6
The one thing Burrrn doesn't do is use adjust for a drive offset when burning the disc

...and for this reason, why not recommend EAC when it can adjust for the drive offset as well as preserve gap information?
Your eyes cannot hear.

  • JJZolx
  • [*][*][*][*]
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #7
The one thing Burrrn doesn't do is use adjust for a drive offset when burning the disc

...and for this reason, why not recommend EAC when it can adjust for the drive offset as well as preserve gap information?


Does EAC now burn directly from Flac files?  I don't recall that it did in the past.  If it does, then yes, it would be better.  If not, then Burrrn is more convenient.  I'm as anal as the next person about seeking perfect rips, but for a CD that I burn to throw into the car stereo the drive offset is meaningless to me.

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #8
No, and neither does burrrn.  It writes a temp file.
Your eyes cannot hear.

  • JJZolx
  • [*][*][*][*]
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #9
No, and neither does burrrn.  It writes a temp file.


The convenience factor comes from not needing to first decode the Flac files yourself using some other means.  It's a two-click process to create a CD.

  • Porcus
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Need FLAC ripping advice
Reply #10
Cons:
  • Not as flexible as separate tracks
  • Limited number of burners and players


And is troublesome if you have to re-rip single tracks. (Besides, there's AFAIK no way to embed data sessions, so for those CDs you don't get a clone, right?)

I was quite a bit attracted to the image solution, but abandoned it due to the need of re-ripping (then I use a different drive). (Besides, I wanted to use dBpoweramp for the metadata capabilities.)