Which software is best for rippings cds
for wav and aiff
and reasong why is good
Yes i agree, i use dBP with accurate rip enabled.dBP because it allows one to include metadata to a wav rip.
Yes it is, I prefer dBpoweramp over EAC as well, I use it with accurate rip enabled.In my experience. I tried using EAC since i know many audiophiles use this to accurately rip cds. BUt was annoywed at the speed at which it rips. Patience is must,. But i found dbpoweramp awesome. It used the processors all the cores and rips the cds so fast. I use 2x cd ripping as compared to the default 16x. at 2x speed it takes around 15 to 20 mins for a cd top be ripped. But quality is awesome. can be ripped to any format
dBP because it allows one to include metadata to a wav rip.
Unlikely since flac is lossless and a regenerated WAV file is binary bit perfect with the original WAV, except for maybe Metadata which is immaterial.Hi,
If you are interested in Quality reproduction of music you should rip your CDs in WAV format. Playing FLAC files through a software and comparing them with a WAV file of the same song i find WAV sounds better.
Cheers.
That's the theory. In practise, it would depend on the software used for playback. In any event, wav has near-universal while flac doesn't. The historic reason to not rip to wav was lack of metadata, which is now solvedUnlikely since flac is lossless and a regenerated WAV file is binary bit perfect with the original WAV, except for maybe Metadata which is immaterial.
I would think that any perceived differences are psychosomatic, with all due respect.
As I understand dbp has recently come up with adding metadata to wav files which is like having the best of both worlds. hence would most bdp/ network players be able to read wav files with metadata off a portable hdd or would that capability be restricted only to flac with metadata?
I'm about to rip my audio CDs, I've been scouring endless sites but only succeeded in getting more confused with the never-ending wav vs uncompressed flac war wrt audio quality. Would appreciate advice on this please. my ultimate goal is to play the ripped files on my 2ch home stereo setup.
Why?That's the theory. In practise, it would depend on the software used for playback.
Varying levels of conversion efficiency and qualityWhy?
But if the two source files is are identical, why would this matter?Varying levels of conversion efficiency and quality
Hi,
If you are interested in Quality reproduction of music you should rip your CDs in WAV format. Playing FLAC files through a software and comparing them with a WAV file of the same song i find WAV sounds better.
Cheers.
Don't know if your BDP will be able to read the meta data but I would suggest you to rip to wav if you're using dBP to rip.
I agree with @harry123456 that wav sounds superior to flac when ripping the same track. Mathematically a flac is completely lossless and in theory can be decompressed to exactly the original wav, but actual hearing tells a different story. The extra step of decompressing a flac to wav for playback might be responsible in somehow degrading the sound. Of course this is purely my speculation.
But if the two source files is are identical, why would this matter?
Flac is "lossless" compression. If you took a document, zipped it up (whether using winzip or some other software), and then unzipped it, you would get the exactly the same document. Not a slightly corrupted version of it. It's the same with flac.
And decoding flac is very very fast. Even the most inefficient playback software wouldn't get it wrong.
However, everyone is free to believe what they wish. Facts remain facts, though.
Oh wow! Really? Thanks for letting me know... Didn't realize it's easy.Listening is the final arbiter. Compare for yourself. It's easy to do.