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: Foobar track comparison question (Read 514 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Foobar track comparison question

Hello everyone, I am new to the forum so I hope my question is being posted on the correct category. Please, forgive me if I am posting on the wrong category.

I am ripping some CDs and my ripping tool is Foobar2000 v2.1.2. I ripped my CD the first time in lossless (FLAC format) and I also re-ripped it once again (in FLAC) and was doing some checks for every track with "Utilities - Bit compare tracks..." function.

For some of the tracks, I received the message as in the image attached. May anyone please tell me if this is correct? Does it mean that both versions are lossless and if truncating extra leading/trailing sections they became identical? I want to know if I correctly ripped them and nothing is lost.

Thanks in advance for your answer.
I also installed EAC but I found it too difficult to handle.

Re: Foobar track comparison question

Reply #1 –
Nothing to worry about here.  The text at the top tells you everything you need to know:
Quote
the tracks became identical after applying offset and truncating first/last samples.

...and, in particular:
 
Quote
Extra leading/trailing sections contained only null samples.

In other words, if you discard any leading and or trailing null samples in both tracks, what's left is the same.  The technicalities are that a CD does not have tracks on it, just silences of a few seconds between bursts of audio data, and a separate block of index data telling the player where to find the beginning of each burst (ie "track").  A ripper uses that index data to split the rip into individual tracks, but it's not sample-accurate.

Quote from: Marin30 on
I also installed EAC but I found it too difficult to handle.
Why, what's wrong with it?  EAC is my go-to ripper (then I use MP3Tag to do the tagging).

I admit you have to set up your compression options, but there are tutorials for that (just google "eac rip to flac"), and then all you have to do is load the CD and click the "CMP" button.
It's your privilege to disagree, but that doesn't make you right and me wrong.

Re: Foobar track comparison question

Reply #2 –
Quote from: fooball on
Nothing to worry about here.  The text at the top tells you everything you need to know:
Quote
the tracks became identical after applying offset and truncating first/last samples.

...and, in particular:
 
Quote
Extra leading/trailing sections contained only null samples.

In other words, if you discard any leading and or trailing null samples in both tracks, what's left is the same.  The technicalities are that a CD does not have tracks on it, just silences of a few seconds between bursts of audio data, and a separate block of index data telling the player where to find the beginning of each burst (ie "track").  A ripper uses that index data to split the rip into individual tracks, but it's not sample-accurate.

Quote from: Marin30 on
I also installed EAC but I found it too difficult to handle.
Why, what's wrong with it?  EAC is my go-to ripper (then I use MP3Tag to do the tagging).

I admit you have to set up your compression options, but there are tutorials for that (just google "eac rip to flac"), and then all you have to do is load the CD and click the "CMP" button.

Thank you very much for your answer :) I was a little bit unsure and wanted to confirm.
For the moment I am keeping Foobar2000, since I found a little bit hard to do all the configurations in EAC.
Anyway, at the end of the day both tools practically do the same thing, so it is just a matter of preferences :)

Re: Foobar track comparison question

Reply #3 –
Quote from: Marin30 on
Anyway, at the end of the day both tools practically do the same thing
I admit I have not tried FB2K ripping, but my reason for using EAC is it is the gold standard for retrying difficult (ie scuffed) CDs until it extracts as good a rip as possible.
It's your privilege to disagree, but that doesn't make you right and me wrong.

Re: Foobar track comparison question

Reply #4 –
Quote from: fooball on
Quote from: Marin30 on
Anyway, at the end of the day both tools practically do the same thing
I admit I have not tried FB2K ripping, but my reason for using EAC is it is the gold standard for retrying difficult (ie scuffed) CDs until it extracts as good a rip as possible.
Thank you once again. May you please link me a good article with the steps how to set up EAC? I have already installed it, I followed this artcile: https://flemmingss.com/perfect-cd-ripping-to-flac-with-exact-audio-copy/, but when I got stuck at "Calibrate AccurateRip" section. I couldn't manage to appear that pop up or find it anywhere else.

Re: Foobar track comparison question

Reply #5 –
Quote from: fooball on
Quote from: Marin30 on
Anyway, at the end of the day both tools practically do the same thing
I admit I have not tried FB2K ripping, but my reason for using EAC is it is the gold standard for retrying difficult (ie scuffed) CDs until it extracts as good a rip as possible.

And what about the situation when it says differences found, the tracks became identical after applying offset and truncating first/last samples but extra leading/trailing sections contained non-null samples?

Re: Foobar track comparison question

Reply #6 –
Discussion about setting up EAC should move to the CD Hardware/Software board.
korth
 

Re: Foobar track comparison question

Reply #7 –
Quote from: Marin30 on
Thank you once again. May you please link me a good article with the steps how to set up EAC? I have already installed it, I followed this artcile: https://flemmingss.com/perfect-cd-ripping-to-flac-with-exact-audio-copy/, but when I got stuck at "Calibrate AccurateRip" section. I couldn't manage to appear that pop up or find it anywhere else.

From https://captainrookie.com/how-to-setup-exact-audio-copy-for-flac-ripping/ ;
Quote
If you have an older version of EAC or dBpoweramp installed, it’s likely AccurateRip was already configured and this may not appear.
...but I only compress to MP3 using LAME.  An alternative is to rip to WAV and then convert to FLAC afterwards.
It's your privilege to disagree, but that doesn't make you right and me wrong.

Re: Foobar track comparison question

Reply #8 –
Quote from: fooball on
Quote from: Marin30 on
Thank you once again. May you please link me a good article with the steps how to set up EAC? I have already installed it, I followed this artcile: https://flemmingss.com/perfect-cd-ripping-to-flac-with-exact-audio-copy/, but when I got stuck at "Calibrate AccurateRip" section. I couldn't manage to appear that pop up or find it anywhere else.

From https://captainrookie.com/how-to-setup-exact-audio-copy-for-flac-ripping/ ;
Quote
If you have an older version of EAC or dBpoweramp installed, it’s likely AccurateRip was already configured and this may not appear.
...but I only compress to MP3 using LAME.  An alternative is to rip to WAV and then convert to FLAC afterwards.

Thank you, will have a look at this.