[Music Alchemist]

There is no way that RG can mess up with the dynamics. But you should ask around, here and/or in Hydrogen or Computer Audiophile, for more info.

 
All I know is that it sounded much better after converting to new files without the tags. "Something" interfered with the sound; just don't know how.

 

[bgentry]

I suggest you both this reading: http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Replay_Gain

There are different implementation of RG. Not all of them just write tags. Some also alter the file itself.

Wow, what a mess that is! It makes me glad that: I'm using 99+% FLACs in my collection. ...and that I'm using JRiver MC, which has all of this figured out, independently of the Replay Gain "standard" which isn't really very standard according to the link above! Wow.

Brian.

 

[konseki]

   
I was talking about converting files, not ripping CDs. foobar2000, dBpoweramp, and Exact Audio Copy can rip files from CDs that are identical. They should also be able to convert files that are identical. I suspect that the person I mentioned just had some settings activated in foobar2000 that were interfering with things.
 
 
Don't worry about the resolution of the files from digital music stores. All that matters is the recording and master that was used. Unfortunately, they do not normally disclose such information, and much of the time you can't even preview an album before purchasing it, which leaves us in the dark.
 
How many CDs do you have? What is the maximum storage capacity of your portable player? From that, I can tell you what is your best course of action.
 
Upsampling files is pure nonsense. You're just filling them with empty space. It does nothing to improve the sound.
 
Even a cheap CD drive can rip a perfect copy of a CD nearly all the time. This has been proven by comparing the rip to others via the AccurateRip database and other software that analyzes the data down to the last bit.

 
Hi can I check with you is ripping to FLAC from CDs using EAC or foobar better? Because foobar sounds more dynamic.
Or is there a need to convert to FLAC directly from CD using EAC? Then EAC wav to convert to flac using foobar then compare? Do I need to check synchronise option with EAC?
 
And high res audio can we get from Itunes? I have bought m4a from Itunes so far but it sounds kinda like crap to me except for a few.
And I am wondering if SonyA25 or Fiio can play the m4a.

 

[hogger129]

   
Hi can I check with you is ripping to FLAC from CDs using EAC or foobar better? Because foobar sounds more dynamic.
Or is there a need to convert to FLAC directly from CD using EAC? Then EAC wav to convert to flac using foobar then compare? Do I need to check synchronise option with EAC?
 
And high res audio can we get from Itunes? I have bought m4a from Itunes so far but it sounds kinda like crap to me except for a few.
And I am wondering if SonyA25 or Fiio can play the m4a.

 
EAC and foobar2000 should produce the same result when ripping a CD to x format.  You can verify this using foobar2000's binary comparison tool.
 
iTunes sells 256kbps AAC files.  Those have an .m4a file extension.  I would guess that the bad sound you perceive is because the mastering isn't ideal.  256kbps AAC is usually indistinguishable from the original source.  As for high-resolution files (24/88, 24/96), there is no audible benefit since 16/44.1 lossless files already reproduce everything within the range of human hearing, perfectly.
 
I know that my Fiio X1 has no problem playing AAC files.

 

[430633]

Hello everyone, if I were to re-rip my CDs will the second file be of the same quality as the first?

 

[Slogra]

Not sure if it was mentioned yet, but Peak Normalization is NOT LOSSLESS, so don't use it! You will regret it.
And it has no real use whatsoever.

Personally i use replaygain all the time. This is only a tag. So i can simply disable it any time.

 

[Redcarmoose]

I have to tell you Foobar2000 has really become something of a Swiss Army knife for files. After you get familiar there is a simple way of changing any file to something else. I load an album in FLAC then do a quick covert to Apple Lossless for my iPods. I have taken SACD rips and quick converted them to Apple Lossless or FLAC. I’ve taken HD files and made 320kbps files. You have to take a little time to find the codecs but after that it’s a breeze. There is even a DSD and SACD codec which allows you to play those level of files on your computer.

As I may have mentioned earlier you can also use Foobar2000 to rip your CDs into any format needed. There may be a couple rare formats it does not rip to, but it’s amazing none the less.

 

[Neccros]

As I may have mentioned earlier you can also use Foobar2000 to rip your CDs into any format needed. There may be a couple rare formats it does not rip to, but it’s amazing none the less.

I like using EAC for its Accurip feature.... Also I am picky about tags and cover art so I do that separately from ripping...

 

[Sterling2]

EAC and foobar2000 should produce the same result when ripping a CD to x format. You can verify this using foobar2000's binary comparison tool.

iTunes sells 256kbps AAC files. Those have an .m4a file extension. I would guess that the bad sound you perceive is because the mastering isn't ideal. 256kbps AAC is usually indistinguishable from the original source. As for high-resolution files (24/88, 24/96), there is no audible benefit since 16/44.1 lossless files already reproduce everything within the range of human hearing, perfectly.

I know that my Fiio X1 has no problem playing AAC files.

I'm an iTunes fan boy. Ripping from CD is no exception. Although i cannot distinguish 256k AAC from ALAC, I usually, rip CDs to ALAC. I enjoy the ALAC, AAC, AIFF, and even some mp3's I have on my computer in one of three ways on my home theatre system: 1. Airplay via Airport Express base station connected to pre/pro's optical Toslink input at 16/44, 2. usb to S/PDIF conversion, handling up to 24/96, to pre/pro, and 3. usb DAC at 24/192 to pre/pro's stereo analog input. I've gotta tell ya, whether it's a 256k file over Airplay, or a 24/192 file over usb DAC, it all sounds great; and, so far, I've only been able to distinguish some of my DOO WOP 256k iTunes Store downloads to sound different when played through the usb DAC, which seems to reveal the poor recording/mastering of the tunes. On contemporary downloads or CD rips, it all sounds the same to me.

 

[astrostar59]

I'm an iTunes fan boy. Ripping from CD is no exception. Although i cannot distinguish 256k AAC from ALAC, I usually, rip CDs to ALAC. I enjoy the ALAC, AAC, AIFF, and even some mp3's I have on my computer in one of three ways on my home theatre system: 1. Airplay via Airport Express base station connected to pre/pro's optical Toslink input at 16/44, 2. usb to S/PDIF conversion, handling up to 24/96, to pre/pro, and 3. usb DAC at 24/192 to pre/pro's stereo analog input. I've gotta tell ya, whether it's a 256k file over Airplay, or a 24/192 file over usb DAC, it all sounds great; and, so far, I've only been able to distinguish some of my DOO WOP 256k iTunes Store downloads to sound different when played through the usb DAC, which seems to reveal the poor recording/mastering of the tunes. On contemporary downloads or CD rips, it all sounds the same to me.

Oh my...

 

[nodoubt]

lol ! too funny astro!