[Laptopia]

I have several dozen CDs ripped to FLAC using EAC. I've only just learned about drive offsets (from www.accuraterip.com), so I had a null drive offset setting when I ripped those several dozen initial CDs. I've corrected the oversight.

Question: Would you re-rip? Did not having a number in the drive offset box result in an inaccurate rip?

 

[Ross1]

no, especially since those drive offsets are wrong anyway.

 

[ShadowVlican]

i wouldn't..... a couple hundred (max) offsets is nothing when there's 44100 in a second..... you just don't miss much....

 

[pedxing]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif no, especially since those drive offsets are wrong anyway.

Some on the AccurateRip list might be wrong, but I know my Plextor drive is correct because Plextor displays their offsets too with their PlexTool software (although it has to be multiplied by like -4 to get the correct number).

However, I don't think its worth reripping unless you wanted bit perfect copies. But achieving bit perfect copies may require more than entering correct offsets, especially if you are trying to generate fully compliant cue sheets. The differences are so minor, I doubt you would hear any missing material.

 

[Jaska]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob ♫ /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have several dozen CDs ripped to FLAC using EAC. I've only just learned about drive offsets (from www.accuraterip.com), so I had a null drive offset setting when I ripped those several dozen initial CDs. I've corrected the oversight. Question: Would you re-rip? Did not having a number in the drive offset box result in an inaccurate rip?

No. I did re-rip, and now can say that my rips are accurate. Actually, I have ripped every CD I own with both EAC and PlexTools Professional and compared the results (by converting the separate FLAC files to a single WAV for each ripped ablum and using foobar2000's comparison tool) to go a step beyond AccurateRip. For me, it's time well spent to compare rips using different software, but re-ripping just to compensate for the drive offsets is a complete waste of time.

 

[lipidicman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaska /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have ripped every CD I own with both EAC and PlexTools Professional and compared the results (by converting the separate FLAC files to a single WAV for each ripped ablum and using foobar2000's comparison tool)

Could you simply have compared the flac fingerprint as this is the MD5 of the raw WAV data. Quicker I think too

 

[Laptopia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaska /img/forum/go_quote.gif No. I did re-rip, and now can say that my rips are accurate. Actually, I have ripped every CD I own with both EAC and PlexTools Professional and compared the results (by converting the separate FLAC files to a single WAV for each ripped ablum and using foobar2000's comparison tool) to go a step beyond AccurateRip. For me, it's time well spent to compare rips using different software, but re-ripping just to compensate for the drive offsets is a complete waste of time.

What did you learn from this? Which was the preferred (more accurate) ripping application? Any tips, EAC settings, etc.?

 

[Laptopia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lipidicman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Could you simply have compared the flac fingerprint as this is the MD5 of the raw WAV data. Quicker I think too

How does one compare a FLAC "fingerprint"? Are you talking about the size of the files, or metadata, or?

 

[ShadowVlican]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob ♫ /img/forum/go_quote.gif How does one compare a FLAC "fingerprint"? Are you talking about the size of the files, or metadata, or?

ignore that.... since your so called "raw WAV" has the incorrect offset anyways

 

[cooperpwc]

A vote of confidence for the AccurateRip site: I tested some CDs that are found on the Technology page of the EAC site and confirmed the AcurateRip reading (+48 for my Pioneer drive).
Here is the list of CDs that will allow you to do your own tests with EAC under Preferences/Drives/Offset. Click on Technology then scroll down. This will probably only work if you have several; one CD on their list gave an impossibly wrong reading but the next two agreed with each other and with the site.

 

[lipidicman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob ♫ /img/forum/go_quote.gif How does one compare a FLAC "fingerprint"? Are you talking about the size of the files, or metadata, or?

That Q was for Jaska

 

[Ross1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pedxing /img/forum/go_quote.gif Some on the AccurateRip list might be wrong, but I know my Plextor drive is correct because Plextor displays their offsets too with their PlexTool software (although it has to be multiplied by like -4 to get the correct number). However, I don't think its worth reripping unless you wanted bit perfect copies. But achieving bit perfect copies may require more than entering correct offsets, especially if you are trying to generate fully compliant cue sheets. The differences are so minor, I doubt you would hear any missing material.

Plextor got their offsets from accurate rip and implemented them because of customer pressure. In reality, all the accurate rip offsets should be 30 samples less. Which, ironically, means that most plextor drives actually have no offset.

 

[Jigglybootch]

How is it that all the offsets on the AccurateRip site are wrong?

 

[cooperpwc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jigglybootch /img/forum/go_quote.gif How is it that all the offsets on the AccurateRip site are wrong?

They're not. It's just that Ross1 tells those kind of inside jokes where only he's on the inside.

 

[uzziah]

well, what's your offset? my liteon is lik +7 or something ridiculously small and insignificant. if it's lik +800 then you might consider reripping, or even another drive


ok, folks, here's granmaster uzi's guide to ripping for nooobs


step1: download eac, accurate rip function, flac or whatever else you need
2. dig chris myden's bestmp3 guide to download nero ASPI and a myden profile
2b. install accuraterip and put that DLL in your EAC folder, it'll prompt you when you put a cd in to "configure", just do it, it might take a couple cd's before you get a recognized one, don't sweat it
3. and here's the end all be all:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=30959

that guide is pure sex and my setup is almost exactly like that except
1. i don't have eac write a file for the extraction results cuz i don't need it
2. i just rip to wav, no compression in EAC, although i've let EAC go to FLAC before and it works just fine
2b. i have EAC auto-connect to freedb to get the song info
3. i'll use burst mode and test and copy (shift+f6) usually first; then i check if it's accurate or not with accurate rip

here are the common options

1. all accurately ripped..............hooray!!!!!!!!!!
2. some accurate and some not (generally i'll get most accurate and a couple not): THIS is the time when accuraterip is actually giving you useful info; i re-rip those tracks again with burst mod shift+F6, and if i still get not-accurate then i use secure mode; if it still doesn't work than maybe getting into cleaning the cd depending on how much i like it

3. all not-accurate; usually accuraterip will mention the truth that this is probably (almost certainly unless something's really ****ed) that you just don't have a pressing that's in the database; i find this is reasonably common, just a hole in the accuraterip ability alas; if you get this then you just don't know if it's accurate; i'll usually re-rip with secure mode, and if it's a favorite disc of mine, i'll clean it well, then rip with secure mode



ok, so i get my wav's and then what i do is i turn them into AAC's with itunes, not deleting the wav's for my ipod, then i take flac frontend and flac-them and kill the wavs



after you get things set up it just flys; especially with accurate rip you can use burst mode first since you'll know if it got it wrong


peace, and don't stress too much; it'll still sound great; you see the cd-player guys stressing about their lost bits? nope, maybe that's why they're happier and more mentally stable then us PC-goofs