[theAloof]

Greetings
Diving into the world of audio sure is complex, just learnt that Windows Media Player is not that good for ripping CDs to flac.

There are quite a few software for ripping and these two seems more appealing to get the best accuracy out of my CDs, EAC and dBpoweramp.

So which one is "better" what are your preferences? I Don't mind other recommendations as well.

I'm not very computer literate so I prefer something that's easy to use without too much editing for tracks and artists or messing around file properties.

 

[Roseval]

I'm not very computer literate

Have a look at dBpoweramp, easy to configure: http://www.dbpoweramp.com/cd-ripper-setup-guide.htm
Can't say that about EAC: https://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=EAC_configuration

 

[tomb]

I've used EAC for over a decade, now. FLAC, however, is better left separate. Use the EAC to ensure you get a bit-perfect set of wav files onto your PC, then use Foobar to convert to FLAC. The FLAC conversion happens in a few seconds for an entire CD.

If you're not very computer literate, then perhaps Roseval's suggestion is better. That said, you should work on being more computer literate, at least with files, folders, and file manipulation. You'll need to know all of those things once you start building a library of digital music files. After all, you know how to open a CD, load it, store it on a shelf, etc. Those are physical things that come naturally to a human being, but the analog comparison to digital files is a perfect match.

 

[theAloof]

I've used EAC for over a decade, now. FLAC, however, is better left separate. Use the EAC to ensure you get a bit-perfect set of wav files onto your PC, then use Foobar to convert to FLAC. The FLAC conversion happens in a few seconds for an entire CD.

If you're not very computer literate, then perhaps Roseval's suggestion is better. That said, you should work on being more computer literate, at least with files, folders, and file manipulation. You'll need to know all of those things once you start building a library of digital music files. After all, you know how to open a CD, load it, store it on a shelf, etc. Those are physical things that come naturally to a human being, but the analog comparison to digital files is a perfect match.

Why do you use another software to convert to flac from the wav files ripped from EAC? Generally I prefer one software to do all the work if possible. I'm willing to learn but I've never been good with computers.

 

[Neutral Freq]

I believe EAC uses an external open-source (developed by a community at a single point source) FLAC software internally so your going to end up using another external software either way (technically). FLAC software is independent of Foobar and EAC, etc.

https://github.com/xiph/flac

Only difference is maybe EAC is using a different version (1.42). Foobar may use 1.41, etc. YMMV. But in the end, it's likely from the same software point source. EAC is not user friendly (German User Interface) so it makes sense to do your FLAC conversion somewhere else IMO. Where EAC excels (German Engineering) is the initial conversion to extract from CD and that's everybody's core want. It's better to do FLAC conversion elsewhere as you will be pulling your hair out in EAC and which ever FLAC conversion software you choose, it's still using the same core FLAC software mentioned above. Once you start editing of WAV/FLAC files to your preference before the FLAC conversion process, it doesn't make sense to use EAC for editing purposes as there are much better options out there.

I don't remember much more as I completely moved on from FLAC and only exclusively use WAV. Disk space is cheap and once your chain is super tight, there is a audible difference with WAVs. FLAC, in my case, is a bottleneck and one less thing to worry about in the chain.

After EAC converts to full album WAV w/ zero embedded album art, my preference is XLD for MacOS as I only exclusively use full album WAVs w/ embedded album art. Occasionally I might use full album FLACs w/ emdedded album art (just for testing not production) or single file FLACs (iPhone). EAC doesn't have the ability for full albums w/ embedded album art besides the initial WAV w/ zero embedded album art conversion so I don't install the external FLAC software at all in EAC. I too completely bypass the FLAC conversion in EAC.

EAC also does single file WAVs, but full album is much easier to manage and again disk space is cheap. I recommend extracting full album from EAC for archival purposes and then whatever your use case, the FLAC conversion software will take care of. Treat them independently.

I also use IMGBURN (Windows Software) on Linux to make a complete backup CD as CD rot is a thing at the same time I use EAC. I use EAC on Linux, but all of this should apply to Windows. I use complex Linux Audiophile Operating System with a realtime low latency kernel custom specific to my Intel Xeon CPU, so I like to keep all my Audiophile Software in one space. I also do my gaming on a realtime low latency kernel in Linux. I have no knowledge of Windows.

The important thing is that your software (In this case, EAC) hits the AccurateRip database.

http://www.accuraterip.com/

Hopefully, your CD/DVD drive is supported as a few config parameters are important: drive offset and C2 pointers.

http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm

After EAC is installed, the AccurateRip database will configure your drive offset config. If your drive is not supported, purchasing another drive should not be too difficult as they are usually low cost. In the past, I prefered Plextor drives for ripping but there are so many options now (See supported drives on AccurateRip site). Plextor is discountined.

Afterwards, you just need to make sure C2 Pointers and audio cache is set correctly and that should be it.

It's worth the effort to set the foundation now instead of mass spawning of ripping a bunch of CDs and realise you have to redo over in the future because of a simple config parameter not set correctly. It's pretty straightforward especially when you have logs to compare against.

I'll try to post a AccurateRip log for reference. Without logs to cross reference, you won't know if your config is correct so I'll try my best to post soon.

Oh, the AccurateRip database also gives you a log (make sure you save at the end) of confidence along with the config parameters. The log gives a confidence sample size, so if 100 users ripped bit perfect error free you will get a confidence of 100. Once I post log, you will get a better understanding. I have rare well-mastered CDs so the confidence is low but popular compressed CDs the confidence is higher since higher sample size of users.

 

[Neutral Freq]

Here is the CD:

Only Audio purists can spot this type of CD by the design and the country where it's pressed. I keep my chain as honest to the source as possible so you can't get anymore honest than CD pressings before sound processing became a thing. This will make the sample size in the log below low as the AccurateRip database is modern not legacy. But the confidence is not about quality, only quantity (sample size).

As long as your config parameters match and verfied it's "accurately ripped", you are good.

These settings should be in "Drive Options" in EAC. F10 is the shortcut key.

You should end up with a cue file and a wav file. I recommend saving the log so you will also have a log file. So CD.cue, CD.wav and CD.log for easy management. If you use IMGBURN, you will end up with a cue file and a bin file. CD.cue and CD.bin so keep in a separate directory and the cue files may collide.

The key items:

Used drive  : ATAPI   iHAS124   F   Adapter: 1  ID: 0  <<Make sure it's supported by AccurateRip>>

Read mode               : Secure  <<Default, Don't Worry>>
Utilize accurate stream : Yes  <<Default, Don't Worry.  It's set to "Yes" once you have a supported drive>>
Defeat audio cache      : Yes  <<Default is "No", Need to Worry Big Tyme because this is the most important parameter.  Set to "Yes".>>
Make use of C2 pointers : No  <<Default is Yes I believe, Need to Worry so make sure it's "No">>

Read offset correction                      : 6  <<It will Default once AccurateRip picks up your specific drive.  The number will change depending on your drive>>

Used output format : Internal WAV Routines
Sample format      : 44.100 Hz; 16 Bit; Stereo (Verify this matches for pure Redbook)

Important setting but just leave as default:

Overread into Lead-In and Lead-Out          : No
Fill up missing offset samples with silence : Yes
Delete leading and trailing silent blocks   : No
Null samples used in CRC calculations       : Yes
Used interface                              : Native Win32 interface for Win NT & 2000

<<Here is the summary.  As you can see, 60+ sample size of the same CD have accurately ripped 100%>>

AccurateRip summary
 
Track  1  accurately ripped (confidence 69)  [217B3CA0]  (AR v2)
Track  2  accurately ripped (confidence 69)  [AF03A844]  (AR v2)
Track  3  accurately ripped (confidence 69)  [443C71CB]  (AR v2)
Track  4  accurately ripped (confidence 66)  [50252DA5]  (AR v2)
Track  5  accurately ripped (confidence 66)  [6C84D063]  (AR v2)
Track  6  accurately ripped (confidence 68)  [FB763AE0]  (AR v2)
Track  7  accurately ripped (confidence 65)  [09B264A2]  (AR v2)
Track  8  accurately ripped (confidence 66)  [DF9E6793]  (AR v2)
Track  9  accurately ripped (confidence 67)  [325A0E92]  (AR v2)
 
All tracks accurately ripped

Full log:

Exact Audio Copy V1.6 from 23. October 2020

EAC extraction logfile from 14. January 2022, 4:05

The Cars / The Cars

Used drive  : ATAPI   iHAS124   F   Adapter: 1  ID: 0

Read mode               : Secure
Utilize accurate stream : Yes
Defeat audio cache      : Yes
Make use of C2 pointers : No

Read offset correction                      : 6
Overread into Lead-In and Lead-Out          : No
Fill up missing offset samples with silence : Yes
Delete leading and trailing silent blocks   : No
Null samples used in CRC calculations       : Yes
Used interface                              : Native Win32 interface for Win NT & 2000

Used output format : Internal WAV Routines
Sample format      : 44.100 Hz; 16 Bit; Stereo


TOC of the extracted CD

     Track |   Start  |  Length  | Start sector | End sector
    ---------------------------------------------------------
        1  |  0:00.32 |  3:44.40 |        32    |    16871
        2  |  3:44.72 |  3:43.38 |     16872    |    33634
        3  |  7:28.35 |  3:43.12 |     33635    |    50371
        4  | 11:11.47 |  3:31.03 |     50372    |    66199
        5  | 14:42.50 |  3:03.40 |     66200    |    79964
        6  | 17:46.15 |  4:12.60 |     79965    |    98924
        7  | 21:59.00 |  4:11.70 |     98925    |   117819
        8  | 26:10.70 |  4:42.55 |    117820    |   139024
        9  | 30:53.50 |  4:15.07 |    139025    |   158156


Range status and errors

Selected range

     Filename C:\users\user\Music\The Cars\The Cars.wav

     Peak level 77.2 %
     Extraction speed 7.7 X
     Range quality 100.0 %
     Copy CRC 148CF55A
     Copy OK

No errors occurred

 
AccurateRip summary
 
Track  1  accurately ripped (confidence 69)  [217B3CA0]  (AR v2)
Track  2  accurately ripped (confidence 69)  [AF03A844]  (AR v2)
Track  3  accurately ripped (confidence 69)  [443C71CB]  (AR v2)
Track  4  accurately ripped (confidence 66)  [50252DA5]  (AR v2)
Track  5  accurately ripped (confidence 66)  [6C84D063]  (AR v2)
Track  6  accurately ripped (confidence 68)  [FB763AE0]  (AR v2)
Track  7  accurately ripped (confidence 65)  [09B264A2]  (AR v2)
Track  8  accurately ripped (confidence 66)  [DF9E6793]  (AR v2)
Track  9  accurately ripped (confidence 67)  [325A0E92]  (AR v2)
 
All tracks accurately ripped

End of status report

 

[theAloof]

I believe EAC uses an external open-source (developed by a community at a single point source) FLAC software internally so your going to end up using another external software either way (technically). FLAC software is independent of Foobar and EAC, etc.

https://github.com/xiph/flac

Only difference is maybe EAC is using a different version (1.42). Foobar may use 1.41, etc. YMMV. But in the end, it's likely from the same software point source. EAC is not user friendly (German User Interface) so it makes sense to do your FLAC conversion somewhere else IMO. Where EAC excels (German Engineering) is the initial conversion to extract from CD and that's everybody's core want. It's better to do FLAC conversion elsewhere as you will be pulling your hair out in EAC and which ever FLAC conversion software you choose, it's still using the same core FLAC software mentioned above. Once you start editing of WAV/FLAC files to your preference before the FLAC conversion process, it doesn't make sense to use EAC for editing purposes as there are much better options out there.

I don't remember much more as I completely moved on from FLAC and only exclusively use WAV. Disk space is cheap and once your chain is super tight, there is a audible difference with WAVs. FLAC, in my case, is a bottleneck and one less thing to worry about in the chain.

After EAC converts to full album WAV w/ zero embedded album art, my preference is XLD for MacOS as I only exclusively use full album WAVs w/ embedded album art. Occasionally I might use full album FLACs w/ emdedded album art (just for testing not production) or single file FLACs (iPhone). EAC doesn't have the ability for full albums w/ embedded album art besides the initial WAV w/ zero embedded album art conversion so I don't install the external FLAC software at all in EAC. I too completely bypass the FLAC conversion in EAC.

EAC also does single file WAVs, but full album is much easier to manage and again disk space is cheap. I recommend extracting full album from EAC for archival purposes and then whatever your use case, the FLAC conversion software will take care of. Treat them independently.

I also use IMGBURN (Windows Software) on Linux to make a complete backup CD as CD rot is a thing at the same time I use EAC. I use EAC on Linux, but all of this should apply to Windows. I use complex Linux Audiophile Operating System with a realtime low latency kernel custom specific to my Intel Xeon CPU, so I like to keep all my Audiophile Software in one space. I also do my gaming on a realtime low latency kernel in Linux. I have no knowledge of Windows.

The important thing is that your software (In this case, EAC) hits the AccurateRip database.

http://www.accuraterip.com/

Hopefully, your CD/DVD drive is supported as a few config parameters are important: drive offset and C2 pointers.

http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm

After EAC is installed, the AccurateRip database will configure your drive offset config. If your drive is not supported, purchasing another drive should not be too difficult as they are usually low cost. In the past, I prefered Plextor drives for ripping but there are so many options now (See supported drives on AccurateRip site). Plextor is discountined.

Afterwards, you just need to make sure C2 Pointers and audio cache is set correctly and that should be it.

It's worth the effort to set the foundation now instead of mass spawning of ripping a bunch of CDs and realise you have to redo over in the future because of a simple config parameter not set correctly. It's pretty straightforward especially when you have logs to compare against.

I'll try to post a AccurateRip log for reference. Without logs to cross reference, you won't know if your config is correct so I'll try my best to post soon.

Oh, the AccurateRip database also gives you a log (make sure you save at the end) of confidence along with the config parameters. The log gives a confidence sample size, so if 100 users ripped bit perfect error free you will get a confidence of 100. Once I post log, you will get a better understanding. I have rare well-mastered CDs so the confidence is low but popular compressed CDs the confidence is higher since higher sample size of users.

Any ideas why the file sizes are so different, when this guy did his rips/conversion?

Thank you for all the information.

 

[Roseval]

FLAC is VBR by design. It uses linear prediction. This is very effciet as a straight line is defined by 2 parameters (y=ax+b). Very efficient compared with that nenourmus amount of samples but not exact as our music isn't linear. Hence there will be a residu. So on decoding: linear prediction + residu=original sample.
If you have a file with digital silence, the prediction wil be perfect and no residu. A single horizontal line will do. If the file is filled with random noise, nothing linear about it so residu equals the sample.
The amount of compression depends on the complexity of the signal.

 

[Neutral Freq]

Any ideas why the file sizes are so different, when this guy did his rips/conversion?

Thank you for all the information.

No worries. I'm glad you are Pro-GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) and Pro-Want to do things correct the first time.

Youtubers are so random. There are so many variables to consider.

But I understand as there is no definitive source to turn to so you have to rely on randoms sometimes.

That's why I'm trying to give you the framework to the Unofficial Industry Standard that "Professional Rippers" have battle tested ever since EAC was released. It's a huge sample size (5+ million?), not just myself.

One variable is Kids these days use such cringe sources. I noticed his source is an MQACD. MQA is a gimmick. Streaming sources are already bad compared to Authentic CDs. There's a reason MQA filed for bankruptcy. CDs from third-party sellers on Amazon also are untrustworthy. You will get mostly static on most tracks and lossy tracks on the other.

So this variable we are working with a unauthentic source to begin with so the end compression result can result in a high variance.

Another variable is he ran uncompressed on the left side of the video and compressed on the right side. You will get different results if you add in variance. But the result makes sense as it's 500MB +- 100MB of the left side and almost half that compressed on the right side. The Youtuber could of at least run uncompressed on the right side to get something more accurate.

I believe there are 8 different levels + uncompressed in FLAC. So he ran uncompressed FLAC on the left side and compressed FLAC on the right side but did not show the compression level.

Anyways, I recommend just saving the Digitial Extraction of the WAV. Don't save any FLAC. Use the WAV source for any FLAC use cases. That' way FLAC can have high variance to suit your needs. High compression for portable like iPhone. Maybe uncompressed for foobar or choose a middle ground of compression. But the key is to have a Exact Copy of your CD for storage.

WAV from CD (Archival)
500MB +- 100MB

FLAC (Throwaway)
50% +- 15% reduction size from WAV from CD depending on compression level

Also I noticed you mentioned editing. EAC will hit the FreeDB database so it will autopopulate data for your WAV, but it's never perfect so you may need to spend one minute editing to your preference for each CD.

So I recommend ripping the same CD a handful of times and save the log at the end to test. Adjust your config parameters as needed. Once everything is set you should not need change anything, ever. FLAC should not be a concern as it's a throwaway and can be adjusted to anytime in the future as long as you have a solid WAV source with your editing preferences. The difficulty should not be that high as it's only 2-3 settings that need to be changed from disable to enable or enable to disable in "Drive Options". Can't remember if there's one setting that may not be in "Drive Options", but can worry about that afterwards.

 

[Neutral Freq]

Oh, I forget since I'm at a different stage in this hobby that Archiving in FLAC is fine too. It's like archiving a compressed .zip file for non-audio.

So if you are worried about disk space, just compress the initial WAV file after the Digital Extraction from the CD with FLAC. You can save a good amount of disk space this way. Delete the WAV files afterwards. Use the FLAC Master to vary your compression levels based on use case to spawn other FLAC files as needed. Most likely you would not even need to spawn and just use the original FLAC Masters for all your use cases.

I only store uncompressed WAV because my individual CD can easily run fifty to a few hundred bucks after International Shipping, so I can justify. I try to only pursue the highest quality of CDs but for normal CDs, Archiving in FLAC is fine. Compressed FLAC can easily be uncompressed back to a WAV if needed. 99% use normal CDs, so everything in FLAC is fine. I'm a rare case.

Also, full album WAV/FLAC may not work on foobar, etc. so you may need to extract to individual WAV/FLAC files. XLD for MacOS handles full album fine, but I haven't tried full album editing with other software.

Playback of full album may be even worse as only certain HQ software can handle full album. So if full album doesn't work, just use individual files. It's mainly for easier maintenance / organization, but I forget not every software supports full album yet. Again, 99% probably use individual and again I'm a rare case. I forget sometimes as I'm super tight with my chain (no half measures philosophy) so I'm a bit extreme.

 

[tomb]

Any ideas why the file sizes are so different, when this guy did his rips/conversion?

Thank you for all the information.

You've gotten good answers thus far, but here are mine:

1. Why use two separate steps?
As another poster states, FLAC is its own LOSSLESS compression and does not "belong" to EAC or dbPowerAmp. It's partly a psychological thing, too. I use EAC to rip to WAV because I know then that I have an absolutely perfect digital copy of the files on the CD. Since FLAC is independent, I can control that separately, still knowing that I have 100% losses. Again, more or less the same thing Neutral Freq said. I've been doing this a long, long time and have about 4 terabytes of bit-perfect FLAC files.

2. Why the difference in file size in the youtube example?
Neutral Freq's answer, "Youtubers are so random." is spot on. So are his comments on MQA.

 

[Roseval]

FLAC is its own LOSSLESS compression and does not "belong" to EAC or dbPowerAmp.

The same applies to WAV.
It is a container format developed by Microsoft and IBM. It has nothing to do with and audio CD. As it is a container you can store anything in it like video or a manual in a info chunk and of course the Waveform Audio Format.
The content of a CD is Linear PCM. It comes with a TOC describing the start of each track.
However, this ISO image is a bit inconvenient on a PC hence we do convert it to a PC audio format.
This format can be anything.
The advice of course is to rip it to a lossless format.
I prefer FLAC because it is lossless but also has excellent tagging support. Can't say that about WAV.
FLAC also contains a built-in MD5, this allows you to check the audio part for data rot.

 

[Neutral Freq]

1. Why use two separate steps?

I've already confused the THREAD_STARTER with computer mumbo jumbo enough, so I'll try to streamline.

1. I only store in WAV format for well-mastered tracks along with a CD backup via IMGBURN.
2. For normal CDs, I store in FLAC format and don't backup the CD.

As for tagging, WAV tagging has improved and I notice no difference for my needs. As long as I can embed Album Art via the right software, I'm good. In the past, WAV tagging was not usable. I only playback in WAV too so don't want to contaminate with another container.

So THREAD_STARTER, please just store in FLAC format. Again, I'm a bit extreme. Well-mastered tracks give me great Euphoria like nothing else so I kind of pigeon-holed myself to only thinking in storing in WAV format.

Examples of well-mastered tracks I will store in WAV not FLAC:

I love my cd collection.
It is a pleasure to look out for the best masterings from all my favorite cd’s
All those great: DCC/MFSL’s Black Triangles, DP’s and other great masterings.
It’s an enormous pleasure to have them and play them.

[External Link] Who else here treats CDs as your most prized physical media?

AC/DC - Back in Black - Japan 2nd pressing 20P2 [same mastering as the 32XD 1st]
Beach Boys - Pet Sounds - Japan 1st CP28
Billy Joel - Glass Houses - Japan 1st 35DP
Bob Dylan - Highway 61 - Japan 1st 30DP
Bowie - All albums through Scary Monsters - Japan 1st or 2nd pressings
Doors - Morrison Hotel - Japan 1st 32XD
Doors - S/T - Japan DCC Gold
Elton John - Tumbleweed Connection - Japan MFSL UD Gold CD
Elton John - Honky Chateau Japan MFSL UD Gold CD
Elvis Costello - All albums through Imperial Bedroom - King Of America Japan 1st R32P
Fleetwood Mac - Rumours - Japan 1st 32XD
Fleetwood Mac - S/T - Japan 1st 32XD
Genesis - All albums through Abacab - Japan 1st Black Triangle 32 & 28VD and a W. German Blue Swirl Vertigo for Abacab
Jimi Hendrix - Electric Ladyland - Japan 1st P58P
King Crimson - Court of the Crimson King - Japan 1st P33P
Led Zeppelin - All albums - Japan 1st 32XD
Miles Davis - Kind Of Blue - Sony 2 channel SACD
Pink Floyd - Dark Side of The Moon - Japan 1st CP35
Pink Floyd - The Wall - Japan 1st 50DP
Queen - News of the World - Japan 2nd CP32
Rolling Stones - Abkco Years - London W. German 1st 820
Rolling Stones - CBS years - Japan 1st 32DP and CP35
Rush - Moving Pictures - W. German Atomic
Rush - Permanent Waves - W. German Atomic
Rush - Signals - W. German Atomic
Steely Dan - Aja - Japan 1st 32XD
Steely Dan - Gaucho - Japan 1st 32XD
Stevie Wonder - Innervisions - Japan MFSL UD Gold CD
The Allman Brothers Band - Eat a Peach - Japan 1st P58P
The Allman Brothers Band - Idlewild South - USA Polydor 823
The Beatles - Abbey Road - Japan 1st CP35
The Beatles - Sgt. Pepper (stereo) - Japan 1st CP32
The Who - Quadrophenia - Japan MFSL UD Gold CD
The Who - Who's Next - Japan 1st P33P
Van Halen - S/T - Japan 1st 32XD and the DCC Gold CD [both have their benefits]
Yes - 90125 - Japan 1st 32XD

[External Link] Your CD Mastering Preferences

I too mix up Japan pressings with West German pressings depending on optimal and availability.

I value the best masterings more than Audiophile Hardware so I don't mind taking extra steps needed.

As for why two separate steps?

I run EAC on Linux, not Windows so I don't want to bother installing FLAC. It can be a pain to configure within the Linux environment.

I boot half a dozen Operating Systems on my PC, so I have three instances of MacOS and the others some Linux variant. I dedicate one MacOS instance just for audio / video editing, one Linux instance for Gaming on a Audiophile OS, etc.. So it's easy to just extract via EAC in Linux, then I reboot into MacOS for XLD tagging and further extract to WAV w/ album art or FLAC as needed. EAC doesn't embed album art for WAVs. I don't think it handles embedded album art for FLACs either since EAC is legacy stable software, not modern.

So basically, I need XLD no matter what so I have no choice but to use two separate steps. Sure I can do Digital Extraction in XLD too and do it all in one step, but EAC is the gold standard.

If I was on Windows, I remember the early days EAC was a pain to tag because of the clunky User Interface. But yes if all you need to change is just Genre or something simple, you can do this all in one step with an external album file. The EAC for Windows version I believe installs FLAC at the same time as EAC so no separate FLAC install.

I just don't know if embedded album art is needed as I'm not sure if EAC can tag that properly. EAC is pretty basic for tagging abilities while Foobar, XLD, etc. are way more advanced.

So I guess if you don't need more advanced tagging abilities, you can do EAC / FLAC all in one step. But if you end up needing tagging elsewhere, mind as well make it a two step process to begin with as it's good to learn advanced tagging early on.

I recommend to the THREAD_STARTED to just try both one step and two steps. If you one step, you can always re-tag later with something more advanced. Whichever meets their needs at this early stage in this hobby. I find that there is always some album that's off in tagging, so I'm constantly re-tagging then replacing the main source with a perfect edited copy. Tagging is never 100% accurate to start to matter how hard you try thus having to eventually goto Foobar, XLD, etc. anyways in the long run. It would be a nightmare to re-tag in EAC. The initial tagging would likely need some adjustment for some not all albums over time.

 

[tomb]

The same applies to WAV.
It is a container format developed by Microsoft and IBM. It has nothing to do with and audio CD. As it is a container you can store anything in it like video or a manual in a info chunk and of course the Waveform Audio Format.
The content of a CD is Linear PCM. It comes with a TOC describing the start of each track.
However, this ISO image is a bit inconvenient on a PC hence we do convert it to a PC audio format.
This format can be anything.
The advice of course is to rip it to a lossless format.
I prefer FLAC because it is lossless but also has excellent tagging support. Can't say that about WAV.
FLAC also contains a built-in MD5, this allows you to check the audio part for data rot.

As you say, WAV is only a format.

On the other hand, FLAC, by definition, requires an executable to actively alter the file. It's lossless because it removes "white space," but it still requires algorithmic processing. It's the reason it has the tagging capability you mention. That makes it distinctly different than WAV or even an ISO image, IMHO.

 

[Roseval]

It's the reason it has the tagging capability you mention. That makes it distinctly different than WAV or even an ISO image

Wonder what you mean.
FLAC uses OGG-Vorbis comments. They are stored in the header.
WAVE has a very limited set of tags in the RIFF header. If you want more, you need to insert a INFO_CHUNCK in the container.
Both can be tagged and you don't need to touch the audio part to do so