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: dBpoweramp VS EAC (Read 9132 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

I would love to hear some input on the likes/dislikes, pros/cons between these two apps.

This might help others too...

I know that dBpoweramp isn't freeware and EAC is, so we can leave that one out...

THANKS
 

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #1 –
EAC:
+ REACT
- slow, stagnated development

dBpoweramp (I don't use but):
+ multiple metadata sources

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #2 –
I prefer to rip using dBpowerAMP.  From my experiences it stresses my optical drives a lot less than EAC, it has been able to securely/accurately rip audio CDs that EAC suffers with, the GUI makes the application easier to use, and the cost really isn't that much.  I paid one amount and now I receive free updates for life.

I used to stick with EAC for my CD ripping needs but then I discovered dBpowerAMP and haven't used EAC in quite a bit of time.  My only complaint is that dBpowerAMP's ability to use updated exe encoder files is sketchy.  I know there was an issue using the Lame 3.98 exe file with dBpowerAMP in that it wouldn't work.  dBpowerAMP seems to be one step behind the Lame developers when integrating the Lame encoder.  Lame 3.98 is released and then a new version of dBpowerAMP comes out featuring Lame 3.97.

I don't know about the specifics behind each ripper such as secure ripping methods and whatnot but I do know that dBpowerAMP is able to rip certain CDs that EAC can't on my system.  I have also re-ripped my audio CDs a few times (before going lossless) with dBpowerAMP and my optical drives are fine.  I ripped my entire collection twice with EAC and had to purchase a new drive.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #3 –
I used the trial version of the latest dbPowerAmp. I'll buy it if it ever comes out with XML logs and cuesheet + single wav ripping. Until then I could care less about PerfectMeta.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #4 –
I dont like it as a cd ripper that much.  I like how you can use two cpus to encode files so i use it to transcode my flac files to LAME mp3.  I also like how it has a lot of different codecs that you can download for it.  It is also the only other windows program that can encode apple lossless.  I also like the perfectmeta. It also like how it is easy to setup than EAC (I use EAC anyway).  If i ever have trouble ripping a cd with EAC i will use dBpoweramp to see if it rips it correctly.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #5 –
I have always used EAC, it is freeware, and very good ripper.

I never had problems configuring it, so i don't see the "complexity" as an issue.

But i had some issues with copy protected cds, and so i tried dBpoweramp, and i liked it a lot.

So i bought a pro license (not reference).

I think both are very good.

What i like most about dBpoweramp, is that spoon, mostly, listen to our complains.

I think the ripping engines are comparables, with the balance a little inclined towards dBpoweramp.

What i DO NOT like about dBpoweramp, is that the interface is sometimes non-standard.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #6 –
I've been an EAC user for many years, but I have tried dbPowerAmp too.  Here are my thoughts on the topic:

dbPowerAmp
+ Metadata from multiple sources, including AMG
+ Nice UI
+ Flexible wrt tagging and file naming
+ Downloads artwork.

- Requires a modern PC with *lots* of RAM (i.e. > 1GB) for secure ripping (especially with CDs with long tracks - they are ripped to memory and data comparisons are done from there for speed and less wear on drive)
- Secure ripper costs $$ (though it is reasonably priced)

EAC
+ Tried and true - I've been using it for years.  Very familiar
+ Flexible wrt tagging and file naming
+ Will run on older hardware (works great on my Dell P4 from 2001)
+ Free!

- UI getting a bit long in the tooth
- No artwork download

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #7 –
I tried EAC and didn't like it... so I got dBpoweramp trial, and just "clicked" with it.  I like the look and feel, and found it much more intuitive.  Purchased it when trial expired.  *2 thumbs up*

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #8 –
I use both softwares in this way:

EAC:
-For ripping to lossless format with cuesheets. (It does not import the artwork into the file)

dbPowerAMP:
-For ripping to mp3 with tagging and artwork. (It does not support cuesheets)

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #9 –
I guess there are good reasons to use what the other doesn't have, and just use both...

I didn't notice anything over at EAC's site, any word on when a new version is coming, also when it might be going from beta to final?

THANKS

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #10 –
A new prebeta was supposed to be released several months ago. And there has been some talk about an unicode release with many fixes & enhancements... but if you read the EAC forum, you can see that the project is dead (at least to outside world). I wouldn't worry about the prebeta status of the current version, it's really stable at the moment and IMHO it should be out of the alpha/prebeta/beta(/rc) stage.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #12 –
What are people's opinions about Foobar2000's secure ripping?
Who are you and how did you get in here ?
I'm a locksmith, I'm a locksmith.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #13 –
Never tried it ... maybe i should.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #14 –
Quote from: greynol on
EAC is not exactly dead

Haha, I knew it, story of my life, when I say something, usually it's utter rubbish.  I completely missed that topic somehow (I can't understand it myself). Excellent news, sometimes it's good to be wrong.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #15 –
Quote from: A_Man_Eating_Duck on
What are people's opinions about Foobar2000's secure ripping?


Tried foobar2000 and it messed up on tracks that EAC would securely rip without audible flaws.  I use foobar2000 for my conversion needs (ie lossless to lossy) but that is it.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #16 –
Kornchild2002 how come you dont use dbpoweramp to convert your files?

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #17 –
Quote from: kornchild2002 on
Tried foobar2000 and it messed up on tracks that EAC would securely rip without audible flaws.  I use foobar2000 for my conversion needs (ie lossless to lossy) but that is it.

Were you ripping in standard or paranoid mode when discovered the problem?
Who are you and how did you get in here ?
I'm a locksmith, I'm a locksmith.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #18 –
a man eating duck do you use foobar2000 and why?

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #19 –
I have found in about three or four cases where Foobar2000 could rip a disc in paranoid mode where EAC would just give me a sync error with an audible glitch.
Who are you and how did you get in here ?
I'm a locksmith, I'm a locksmith.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #20 –
ok



One reason why I wouldn't use foobar2000 to rip cds is it doesnt use acuraterip.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #22 –
Quote from: A_Man_Eating_Duck on
Were you ripping in standard or paranoid mode when discovered the problem?


I started off in standard mode and then switched to paranoid.  I have this one particular album with a dimple on it.  Best Buy would not take it back despite my problem.  They popped the disc in their little boom box and it played just fine.  Well I never had any issues playing the disc, I only have problems ripping it.

foobar2000's standard and paranoid modes cannot rip the track and EAC in burst and in secure mode cannot rip the track (there is only one track that is a problem).  dBpowerAMP is the only one that can rip it with good results.  They still don't match up with AccurateRip but I do not hear any audible flaws while both foobar2000 and EAC produced audible flaws.

Quote from: eboyer93 on
Kornchild2002 how come you dont use dbpoweramp to convert your files?


Because I have yet to get Lame 3.98.2 up and running with dBpowerAMP.  Additionally, I can just drag-and-drop my lossless files (even Apple Lossless) into foobar2000.  I don't have to migrate through my hard drive selecting a limited number of tracks or use dBpowerAMP's multi-file converter.  foobar2000 is just easier for me to use.  I still use dBpowerAMP's file converter whenever I want to right-click and convert a set of files (only for lossless files) but I will use foobar2000 when I want to convert a large amount of lossless files to a new lossy setting/encoder.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #23 –
dbpoweramp r13 comes with lame 3.98 and it works fine for me because i like the batch converter.

dBpoweramp VS EAC

Reply #24 –
I prefer dbpoweramp, primarily for the batch ripper (with robotic ripping support). 

-brendan