PDA

View Full Version : adding Ripcompare?



Dude
03-06-2008, 06:24 PM
hi,

to Spoon: what about adding Ripcompare as second database that will be checked if a cd was not in accuraterip?

for information about Ripcompare see:

http://www.ripfactory.com/ripsure.html

They say 2 million cds each month are added to that database!

I would like to hear Spoon's opinion.

thx

Spoon
03-07-2008, 04:59 AM
Non commercially dBpoweramp and EAC will out rip (in disc numbers) more than all RipStation platforms by a huge number, we are established players, dBpoweramp 8 years old, EAC almost 10 years, Ripstation Micro about 1 year old. The commercial CD Ripping market in the USA is well under 1 million CDs per year (of which Batch Ripper has taken a sizable chunk)...

See:

http://www.freedb.org/en/statistics__client_requests.15.html

Last year dBpoweramp would have ripped over 20 Million CDs (most our lookups go to AMG and not freedb), all fed into the AccurateRip database, EAC did 14 Million CDs - almost all of these go into AccurateRip.

So there is losts of talk going on, about a database that has only just appeared is somehow larger in scope than AccurateRip which is over 4 years old and is filled by 2 out of the top 5 popular ripping programs (outside iTunes and WMP).

As they say "nothing to see here, move along" ;)

Dude
03-07-2008, 07:28 AM
So there is losts of talk going on, about a database that has only just appeared is somehow larger in scope than AccurateRip which is over 4 years old and is filled by 2 out of the top 5 popular ripping programs (outside iTunes and WMP).

As they say "nothing to see here, move along" ;)

So it's just a lie that Ripcompare database is bigger then AccurateRip?

EliC
03-07-2008, 07:50 AM
Did they approach you about using AccurateRip? Why develop a parallel system? If it is easy to incorporate, any reason not to add it as it my have pressings or discs not in AR.

Dude
03-07-2008, 10:11 AM
Why develop a parallel system?

Because they say on the site there are added 2 million CDs each month. But I think Spoon says it's not true. But if it's really true, then Ripcompare could be used as 2nd database, just like I said, to check if some cd is not in AccurateRip.

So first AccurateRip is checked, if nothing is found, then Ripcompare could be checked.

Spoon
03-07-2008, 12:06 PM
I am not convinced that 1 'program/system' of limited users (google for "rip station" and ripstation, the combined number is 30K, google for dbpoweramp, then "Exact Audio Copy" and the combined number is 1.5 Million..., or 50x more popular) has a populated database. It has taken 4 years to get the AccurateRip database where it is (there are 2.5 million disc submissions in the database), to do even 1/4 of AccurateRip in say a year would take iTunes or Windows Media Player.

BTW 1/2 Million discs a month, or 6 Million a year, if 4 Million were somehow commercial rips, that is half a million dollars in Meta data fees - I am 99% sure AMG, GD3, or Gracenote do not get half a million dollars from one source, not even from Microsoft who license the whole AMG database for unrestricted use (I know AMG because dBpoweramp is the largest user on their servers)...

We will not be adding support for this database, wether any of the other Rippers will, who knows...

EliC
03-07-2008, 01:11 PM
NP, I was just wondering why the developed a parallel system? Have you ever discussed AR with them? How does their system differ? Can AR2 learn anything from their implementation? Why don't they implement AR?