Is secure ripping really necessary?

[trains are bad]

I've been trying out the Hardy Heron beta release. Now I've been putting off ripping my newest CDs since I'm lazy, and last time I ripped anything I was using EAC.

Well, Wifey had some cds she needed ripped and encoded for work, so I didn't really care much about quality. I popped the CD in, Ubuntu detected it and I clicked 'extract'. Sound Juicer automagically ripped the CD, retrieved the metadata from *somewhere* and tagged everything, encoded it to Ogg, and placed in in a nice labeled album folder in my music directory. I was like, whoa. Then I saw that I could change the settings to encode to lame or flac, and I changed it to flac for future use. To encode to mp3, I dropped the files into soundconverter and clicked 'convert'.

So, I got to wondering what my hangup is with 'secure' ripping. Is it even worth worrying about? I mean I can plug my RH1 minidisc in USB, pop a CD in and hit record on the minidisc and it will rip, tag and transcode the whole CD to the MD in what seems like 30 seconds, at least compared with the slowpoke pace that EAC used to take.

I'm starting to think that most of the appeal of EAC is that it takes so long, so it makes everyone think that it's doing some magical job. Considering I usually listen to imperfect vinyl anyway, I'm considering just saying the hell with worrying about it, why shouldn't I just use whatever's convenient? Is there really *significant, audible* difference in CD ripping, or just an OCD one? And what tools do the linux users in the house use for ripping and tagging?

 

[breakfastchef]

No difference I have found to use EAC exclusively in response to your pondering. The only part that really may make a difference using EAC is the AccurateRip part of this app. But, in the end, if EAC cannot rip a track accurately and spit it out, I just rip it with MediaMonkey and the day is just fine. I am not a linus user, by the way.

 

[Tarkovsky]

It's affect on the sound would be minute compared to that of ogg or mp3 compression, and even moreso transcodings between the two. Does this answer your question?

 

[trains are bad]

No, I always use FLAC for myself. But I'll admit that good lossy sounds perfectly good enough for me.　I just don't use it for transcodability reasons.

 

[oatmeal769]

I'd say if you are doing lossless files, and may burn CD's off them once in a while then yeah, EAC is worth it. But to use EAC to make lossy files - What's the point? You'll hear the lossy file rendering far more than a few errors...

 

[trains are bad]

Quote:

I'd say if you are doing lossless files, and may burn CD's off them once in a while then yeah, EAC is worth it.

why? Why is it worth it? Does it sound better? Does it even make a difference, or does everyone just use it because they assume that it must?

 

[infinitesymphony]

Some drives don't rip accurately on the first pass, or a CD could be damaged in such a way that multiple reads are required. Secure ripping and AccurateRip are useful if you want to be sure that you have a true backup. EAC's noncompliant CUE sheet and drive offset correction features mean that you can have each song stored as an individual file while being able to burn a bit-perfect CD copy if you need one later (as opposed to having the whole album in one large WAV file with a CUE sheet).

 

[Aaron5604]

Quote:

Originally Posted by trains are bad /img/forum/go_quote.gif why? Why is it worth it? Does it sound better? Does it even make a difference, or does everyone just use it because they assume that it must?

Use DBpoweramp instead. It's just as accurate, faster, catalogues via pc by default better, and tags/embeds any additional information within song files w/out any outside assistance, including album art. It even locates the RIFF in .wav's and tags all the basic information which I don't think EAC does. Plus, transcoding is much easier IMO, should you ever decide to swap out for a different codec in the future.

And yes... w/ some albums out there, it will make a huge difference in having Accurate Rips database supporting you, whether you're using EAC or DB because they basically both pull from the same source. Just make sure you spend the few minutes in allowing the program to properly configure the off-set of your CD/DVD drive.

As for proof?

Gravity Kills - Gravity Kills - 02 Guilty, for example. Play the song off the CD first, then rip a copy from say, WMP, and then rip it once more using either EAC or DB and you'll notice REAL quick as to which is more true in sound when matched up w/ the CD.

 

[trains are bad]

double post. i have to say that I'm not much interested in the ability to later burn CD-Rs. For me the point of digital music is to cut the discs out of the chain.

 

[oatmeal769]

Quote:

Originally Posted by trains are bad /img/forum/go_quote.gif double post. i have to say that I'm not much interested in the ability to later burn CD-Rs. For me the point of digital music is to cut the discs out of the chain.

Beyond about 192K, it's hard for me to tell the difference in file quality for most files without a good listen. I can hear between 320K and lossless on some things, but definitely not all.

What bothers me more though is when I rip a cd, and get a pop, crackle, or stuttering etc. here and there. This to me is why I like to be sure I'm getting an error free quality rip. I haven't found a player (itunes, winamp, WMP) that rips without errors as well as EAC
Aside from that, if you know you aren't going to burn discs, and you can't hear a difference, then use the compression you're comfortable with.
However, I'm now redoing most of my CD's because I did them at 192, and now with better gear, I can clearly hear inferiority to lossless on most things. The occasional cracks and stutters bother me a lot more though. Had I done lossless with EAC in the first place I'd be set.

 

[Tarkovsky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by infinitesymphony /img/forum/go_quote.gif Some drives don't rip accurately on the first pass, or a CD could be damaged in such a way that multiple reads are required. Secure ripping and AccurateRip are useful if you want to be sure that you have a true backup. EAC's noncompliant CUE sheet and drive offset correction features mean that you can have each song stored as an individual file while being able to burn a bit-perfect CD copy if you need one later (as opposed to having the whole album in one large WAV file with a CUE sheet).

Exactly!

 

[trains are bad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Beyond about 192K, it's hard for me to tell the difference in file quality for most files without a good listen....

This topic isn't really about compression, it's about EAC, whether it's necessary for someone who doesn't plan to burn CDs, and what comparable tools are available in linux.

 

[Aaron5604]

Quote:

Originally Posted by trains are bad /img/forum/go_quote.gif double post. i have to say that I'm not much interested in the ability to later burn CD-Rs. For me the point of digital music is to cut the discs out of the chain.

Precisely, which is what I have set up. They serve as the one hard copy in further complimenting what I have stored via pc, nothing more

Since storage space is currently not a problem, I prefer to store fully uncompressed files for mostly peace of mind. Until .flac becomes as known w/ the likes of both .wav and .aiff formats, I'll continue to stick to what's most widely supported by the industry. Plus, I'm to lazy in constantly switching between codecs, regardless. All my digital music is comprised of .wav, which was either ripped and confirmed w/ confidence by Accurate Rip, or fully secured by both DB and EAC combined. So, I have very little reason (if any at all) in questioning whether my digital collection is off by even so much as a miniscule from what I originally purchased.

Nevertheless, I won't ever discard the cd's entirely. I mean, it wouldn't be the first time in history to have a slightly flawed/mis-calculated program

 

[oatmeal769]

Quote:

Originally Posted by trains are bad /img/forum/go_quote.gif This topic isn't really about compression, it's about EAC, whether it's necessary for someone who doesn't plan to burn CDs, and what comparable tools are available in linux.

Trains - Regarding EAC, you asked Quote:

Originally Posted by trains are bad /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is there really *significant, audible* difference in CD ripping, or just an OCD one?

To which I essentially answered yes if using lossless, and because of the easy burning, but no if you are using lossy files.

You replied that you use FLAC, and weren't interested in burning. You also asked Quote:

Originally Posted by trains are bad /img/forum/go_quote.gif why? Why is it worth it? Does it sound better? Does it even make a difference, or does everyone just use it because they assume that it must?

To which I and several others answered basically that besides the obvious higher quality of a better sample, that errors are completely audible to even the most callous ear, and EAC eliminates most of them before compressing.
It sounds like you've already made up your mind, (which is totally fine also) and we're now just going around in circles. My opinion is yes, it makes a difference. EAC is necessary for quality rips. If you don't care about that, don't hear it, don't want it, and / or don't agree, great! use whichever program you like. I don't know what else I can tell you.

Regarding Linux, I believe I've read that EAC will work with Linux with one of those Windows emulator programs. I don't use Linux, so I don't know. - Perhaps someone else here does.

I'm hopeful this helps. If not, sorry.

 

[T.B.N.]

I just found out about EAC, but I'm a little confused about certain things I read on the site, like the differences between CD drive features. Are some of these features (audio cache, etc) necessary for accurate rips?

Also, what is the accurate-rip plugin? the website doesn't explain it that well at all...

I'm just wondering if I should not do rips with my laptop, but use my desktop instead, as it has a "full-size" cd-drive...

What exactly does one have to do, after installing the program, to get error-free rips?

Edit: Wow, setting up EAC is even more complicated than I though...