Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Audiograbber Vs EAC (Read 10123 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Audiograbber Vs EAC

I have used Audiograbber for ripping CD's to my computer for many years. I use LAME to make the MP3. I have also read here, that EAC is the program to use. So I tried it.

I ripped 10 songs using both EAC and Audiograbber. I cound NOT hear the difference. So please explain how its better. If you CANNOT hear the difference, how can we say one might be better than the other?

A couple of obsevations, Audiograbber is faster. Also, when ripping a scratched CD, EAC had problems. The MP3 had "clicks" and "ticks" and other unwanted sounds. Audiograbber did not have this problem. (The CD sounded OK when played in the computer).

I will continue to use Audiograbber, but my question is "how can we say one is better than the other when we can NOT hear the difference?" (ripping a CD in Good condition).

Thank you for your time

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #2 –
If you had EAC set up properly, I'm sure it told you before hand that the rip had errors.

If you encounter audible errors with Audiograbber, it will be a surprise.

If you're only concerned with audible errors and you don't mind surprises, then Audiograbber is the ripper for you.

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #3 –
audiograbber - sector correction
eac - sample correction

Quote from: twostar on
I'm sure it told you before hand that the rip had errors.

usually bitwise comparison fails because of the difference of displacement

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #4 –
EAC is a secure ripper, in that its job is to spot and potentially correct (by re-reading) errors. A non-secure ripper will not do this.

For discs with no damage (note damage can be invisible to the eye, called manufacturing defects), all rippers should rip the same (once drive offsets are accounted for).

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #5 –
Sometimes burst-mode is best for ripping some scratched CD's. In my experience EAC will sometimes (if configured to use secure mode) spend too much time trying to correct errors that it can't correct anyway, but which the drive itself will correct in burst-mode.

Using burst-mode EAC should be at least as fast as audiograbber. Burst-mode is sufficient if the CD is present in accuraterip-database and can be verified as accurate. Audiograbber does not provide any of these features for you.

Another thing is that C2 (secure mode) error correction is very drive-dependant.
Can't wait for a HD-AAC encoder :P

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #6 –
Quote
correct errors that it can't correct anyway, but which the drive itself will correct in burst-mode.


Unless you are getting outside verification (AccurateRip) is it possible the bust-mode rip just interpolates the errors to silence.

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #7 –
Quote from: odyssey on
Sometimes burst-mode is best for ripping some scratched CD's. In my experience EAC will sometimes (if configured to use secure mode) spend too much time trying to correct errors that it can't correct anyway, but which the drive itself will correct in burst-mode.

There is nothing inherently different between EAC's burst and secure modes as far as the drive is concerned.  If you're getting accurate rips in burst mode but not secure mode, it is for some other reason; your drive will attempt error correction in either situation.

Quote from: odyssey on
Another thing is that C2 (secure mode) error correction is very drive-dependant.

The ability to correct C2 errors effectively may very well be drive-dependent.  Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with EAC's secure mode or EAC's option to make use of C2 pointers, however.

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #8 –
Thank you for all your responces, I will do a little more research.

TAHNRU- Thanks for those links, I will read them shortly.

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #9 –
odyssey, how would you recommend setting up EAC. Sounds to me like you've actually used the program and not just read the directions. My computer has three drives, a Pioneer DVR 1910LS, a Phillips DVD 8631 and a Lite-On LTR-52327S. Is any of these drive better than the other for ripping CDs?

EAC ripped slow, 2x to 4x speed, and it froze (quit working twice). How do I set up the program so that it works atleast as well as Audiograbber. These are the directions I used for setting up EAC http://www.teqnilogik.com/tutorials/eac.shtml

Thanks for your help.



Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #10 –
I've binned my foodfight with odyssey since it really didn't help the discussion.  I want to say that I have no problem with his suggestion to try burst mode in an effort to get rips that are are error-free or that may contain errors which are not audible.

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #11 –
Quote from: Ranger SVO on
EAC ripped slow, 2x to 4x speed, and it froze (quit working twice). How do I set up the program so that it works atleast as well as Audiograbber. These are the directions I used for setting up EAC http://www.teqnilogik.com/tutorials/eac.shtml

I would suggest you look over the guides which are maintained by this forum:
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...gory:EAC_Guides

If all you care about is whether errors are audible and you don't like the results you get in EAC (with whatever configuration), feel free to continue using Audiograbber.

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #12 –
I absolutely meant no disrespect to graynol, and if you took it as disrespectful then I sincerely apologize. Please accept my apology.

As a moderator on a Car Audio Form, I find myself giving advice based on experience. I have found that there is no substitute for real world experience.

I have learned alot about MP3's but I still have a lot to learn.

I just learned that Foobar2000 can rip CD's. And it was pretty fast. Also if I uncheck "allow speed reduction during extraction" EAC works faster.

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #13 –
At the risk of launching into another pointless debate, I will just say that just because I've been driving a car for 25 years does not mean that I understand how a transmission works.

Audiograbber Vs EAC

Reply #14 –
Quote from: Ranger SVO on
odyssey, how would you recommend setting up EAC. Sounds to me like you've actually used the program and not just read the directions. My computer has three drives, a Pioneer DVR 1910LS, a Phillips DVD 8631 and a Lite-On LTR-52327S. Is any of these drive better than the other for ripping CDs?

That really depends!

1. Is the disc available in accuraterip db?
2. How scratched is the disc

If the disc is available in accuraterip, I would just rely on burst-mode with the fastest ripping speed. If I can't get a proper rip because of inconsistence with some of the tracks, I would lower the ripping speed or change to secure-mode (using C2 pointers).

If the disc is badly scratched I would try both secure mode, but also burst mode with the lowest speed possible. If this fails, I'd try another drive.

If the disc is NOT in accuraterip db, it's up to you to decide if the rip is good enough. Personally I feel that test/copy with matching CRC's are sufficient, but most people probably recommends secure mode.

Another thing that might be even better is to test with one drive and copy with another.

The process is a little trivial, and pretty much the same that dBpoweramp has incorporated, so if you want ease of use, that would probably earn the few bucks it costs.

Note, this is MY personal preference - I think if you ask anyone on this forum, they will have their own different preference.
Can't wait for a HD-AAC encoder :P