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: EAC / LAME error (Read 3191 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

EAC / LAME error

Hi, I am hoping someone can tell me what I'm doing or did wrong.

I downloaded the latest LAME version and tried to set it up according to the best practices as found here on this forum.
I think I have done so but maybe I screwed something up ...

I keep getting this error every time I rip an MP3 track with EAC (see jpg attached)

Also, I got this from another member, is this then the best LAME command line to put in EAC for the highest quality MP3 files?

"-V 0 --add-id3v2 --ignore-tag-errors --ta "%artist%" --tt "%title%" --tg "%genre%" --tl "%albumtitle%" --ty "%year%" --tn "%tracknr2%" %source% %dest%"

Or is there something wrong with this line and that's why I'm getting the error after each track?

Thanks in advance for your help. I'm a newbie to this and just want high quality mp3's, but unfortunately don't understand a lot of the language/ procedures given here. Unfortunately I have used EAC before but I still get MP3's that sometimes sound crackle-y during the highs...

EAC / LAME error

Reply #1 –
Update:
Weird... After I posted this I went back to check something, clicked on EAC and it would not open. I got an error of some sort (sorry, I forgot to write it or snip it) ...
So I downloaded a new version of EAC thinking that might solve all my problems...
It did solve the problem of the error message I got after each track. No more of those errors and it compressed my files to mp3 accordingly.

Now my only question is,
Is the command line string as given above for LAME settings correct for getting the absolute best mp3 rips? I don't care one bit about size, or how long the rip takes (within reason), I just want the best sounding mp3's I can get.

Is there a real advantage to using LAME with a command line like above as opposed to using the EAC default settings and compressor?
(I imagine that is a loaded question, so just your opinion or your report of what the general consensus seems to be, or if you want to link me to a thread on that...?)
Thanks!

EAC / LAME error

Reply #2 –
Your screenshot indicates an older EAC version with different placeholders (%s instead of %source%, etc.).

The command line is for 1.0 beta 2 or newer, and should work after an update.

EAC / LAME error

Reply #3 –
Quote from: Frank Bicking on
Your screenshot indicates an older EAC version with different placeholders (%s instead of %source%, etc.).

The command line is for 1.0 beta 2 or newer, and should work after an update.


Thanks for your reply. It does seem to be working now that I downloaded the latest version.

Can you tell me whether my command line settings is getting me in the ball park of "the best quality" MP3 rips? Anything I might consider changing?

EAC / LAME error

Reply #4 –
The -V0 preset is designed to give you consistently (across each file) high quality without wasting space. There are always settings you could tweak to make bigger files, using different audio analysis & encoding algorithms, and maybe having less consistent quality. There may be some rare "killer samples" that one combination of settings does better on than another, but AFAIK, they have not been reliably demonstrated to make an audible difference, at least not to the point where people generally prefer it one way over the other.
 

EAC / LAME error

Reply #5 –
Quote from: mjb2006 on
The -V0 preset is designed to give you consistently (across each file) high quality without wasting space. There are always settings you could tweak to make bigger files, using different audio analysis & encoding algorithms, and maybe having less consistent quality. There may be some rare "killer samples" that one combination of settings does better on than another, but AFAIK, they have not been reliably demonstrated to make an audible difference, at least not to the point where people generally prefer it one way over the other.


Thanks much for replying. Okay, then it sounds like you're saying my command string is about as good as it gets.
Thanks again!