Accurate ripping to WAV

[Son of Odin]

Hi everyone,

I am a soon to be owner of a dbPowerAmp Reference.
I only intend to use the program to rip my entire CD collection to WAV files.
I am looking for the slowest, most accurate reading.Get the rip as accurately as possible (to be exactly like CD).
What do i need to download (from files below) in order to achieve this?:blush:

Download: dBpoweramp Music Converter R13.2 5.3 MB
Download: CD Writer Trial R3.1 1.6MB
Download: Batch Ripper
Install Reference Codec Pack Release 3 7.8 MB

From these files,is anything needed except dBpoweramp Reference?

:confused:Also, has anyone tested this drive TEAC CD-224E (i own it) to see how it works with C2 pointers? :confused:
I intend to use C2 pointers while ripping - if it works well with my drive.

One more thing - I see that FLAC is mostly recommended for ripping.Why not WAV?
WAV should be exactly the same as CD.Is FLAC superior to WAV in any way?
I thought FLAC is around 50% of the size the same file is in WAV.:blush:

[MidnightRambler]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

Hi,
I am in the process of converting my entire collection from FLAC to WAV. If you have very high quality equipment there is a small but noticeable difference in my opinion (as well as others even though they are bit for bit the same). FLAC has much better tagging. You need to download the first and fourth selections in your list. I highly recommend do a test run so you get familiar with the process. I suggest ripping locally to your pc then moving the file to the NAS with a program such as terracopy which is free. As for the metadata dBpoweramp rips both LIST and ID3 tags to WAV files as a default. You need to know which your music renderer will read. Mine only reads the LIST version which is limited in the fields that are available. Under the DSP features you can map other fields to unused ones. For example on LIST tags there is no composer tag--I map the composer to comment so the data is there. dBpoweramp is one of the few programs which can embed album art in the WAV files. I suggest you do not do that. When I tried it caused problems with the transfer of the files, which I was able to isolate to that. I really suggest a test run to work the kinks out of the process. Good luck!

[Teknojnky]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

If you have very high quality equipment there is a small but noticeable difference in my opinion (as well as others even though they are bit for bit the same).

@ midnightrambler,

Assuming there are no decoder issues, there is absolutely [SIZE="6"]Z E R O[/SIZE] difference in sound quality between wave and flac (and any other LOSSLESS codec).

If you believe otherwise, you should prove it to yourself with ABX testing. foorbar2000 has a good abx utility (and bit for bit comparison) that you can use to enlighten yourself.

@ son of odin,

ripping slower does not make your rips any more accurate than if they were ripped at full speed and did not get any errors. The only thing slow rip might help with is on damaged cds, but really it boils down to how well your drive reads through the damage.

Enabling/configuring accuraterip will compare your rip to other people's rip's and return a confidence number of how many other submissions match yours. So if you get (2) or more then at least 2 other people's rip matched yours and you can be sure that it is accurate as it can get.

re flac vs wav, flac and wave have the exact same quality (see above), benefits of flac include much better supported tags including embedded album art and cue sheets. Flac files are smaller than wave files because they in very simple terms zipped up wave files.

for more comparisons see

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lossless_comparison

it all boils down to what is best suited for you, are you itunes or WMP/mediacenter based, or does your player/equipment handle one format but not another.

[MidnightRambler]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

@Teknojnky

Without getting into a holy war on the sound differences of FLAC vs WAV, I had my original ripped collection in FLAC. A prominent figure in the recording industry that I had the privilege of speaking with suggested that I consider a change. While I did not use ABX, I did some blind testing with the help of my wife and I heard a difference that was not coincidence. My system (see below) is extremely resolving and with the WAV files, there were subtle improvements that were enough for me to go through the massive effort of conversion. As you are aware, there are other individuals who agree with the conclusion that I have arrived at even though the MD5 checksum of the same song in FLAC or WAV are identical. There is a reason why certain high resolution music vendors sell their product in WAV (Reference Recordings and Blue Coast Records to name two). I would let Son of Odin come to his own conclusion on which codec to use after some testing.

[bhoar]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

MidnightRambler -

I know you're not going to believe me, but my only comment on the matter is that what you're experiencing is a purely psychological effect based on the advice you are given.

If you use FLAC or WAV, it doesn't matter, the exact same series of bits are being fed to the audio D/A converter. Lossless is Lossless. A FLAC file is like a WAV file in a ZIP archive or even a WAV file stored on a compressed NTFS volume: when you uncompress it, you get the exact same data that was put into it in the first place. There is no data difference and therefore no audio difference at all.

-brendan

[MidnightRambler]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

Yes Lossless is lossless.
Yes the Audio files are the same - bit for bit - I stated in my post the MD5 checksums are identical.
Firmware in the music renderers are different and most convert back to PCM.
I said I did not want to start a holy war. In life you will find differences of opinion.
Most if not all professionals in the recording industry use AIFF or WAV.

[EliC]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

MR, even if you don't believe the scientific fact that there is no difference, what you are planning to do, convert FLAC to WAV makes zero sense, since you believe there is a quality loss with FLAC (and there isnt) it would (but didn't) have already occurred and you will need to re-rip your discs.

[Son of Odin]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

@ son of odin,

ripping slower does not make your rips any more accurate than if they were ripped at full speed and did not get any errors. The only thing slow rip might help with is on damaged cds, but really it boils down to how well your drive reads through the damage.

yes, this is logical...
but in my system i did hear the difference between 48x and 4x.The bass reached a bit deeper.Nothing major, but noticeable.For me, it is enough to use only slow ripping speed.
I am not saying this will happen in every system and that anyone will hear the same.For me,it proved to be true.

So,i guess everyone agrees that FLAC is not superior to WAV.I can understand what MidnightRambler is saying,altough both files are bit-to-bit the same.I also have heard and confirmed things in PC audio that i can't explain.

:teufel8:Sorry to ask again, but it is very important to me:,
Has anyone tested this drive TEAC CD-224E (i own it) to see how it works with C2 pointers?
I intend to use C2 pointers while ripping - if it works well with my drive.:teufel8:

MR, even if you don't believe the scientific fact that there is no difference, what you are planning to do, convert FLAC to WAV makes zero sense, since you believe there is a quality loss with FLAC (and there isnt) it would (but didn't) have already occurred and you will need to re-rip your discs.

Yes, i think you will need to re-rip your CDs,Rambler.Sorry:cry:

You need to download the first and fourth selections in your list. I highly recommend do a test run so you get familiar with the process. I suggest ripping locally to your pc then moving the file to the NAS with a program such as terracopy which is free.

Thanks!
Test run is obligatory:D
As for the rest, you are WAY ahead of me.I am not close to you in terms of understanding all this.I intend to rip the files to my PC and keep them there..I use Windows XP,player is Foobar 08.3 with SRC upsampler (thanks to Steve Nugent from Empirical Audio).

P.S.
What is Batch Ripper and what does it do?
Also, if i understood correctly,this is how the process goes with dbPoweramp:
1.Download the file
2.Install the downloaded file
3.Register and pay for the program
4.Rip,rip,rip!

[Spoon]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

Many modern CD/DVD drives give better (more accurate) results when ripping at high speed. Even at x4 if AccurateRip says it is accurate and the same at x32 then the exact same data resulted from both rips.

Also, if i understood correctly,this is how the process goes with dbPoweramp:
1.Download the file
2.Install the downloaded file
3.Register and pay for the program
4.Rip,rip,rip!

There is a 3.5 step which is to install the registered version.

[Teknojnky]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

There is a reason why certain high resolution music vendors sell their product in WAV (Reference Recordings and Blue Coast Records to name two).

Of course there is, because there is a sucker born every day.

I would let Son of Odin come to his own conclusion on which codec to use after some testing.

Yes of course, I'm simply raising the BS flag to help keep the audiophoolary here at a minimum.

[MidnightRambler]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

@Son of Odin:
I am actually converting FLAC to WAV using dBpoweramp. I never questioned that the files are identical. I feel that the answer lies in the conversion from FLAC to PCM which occurs on the fly. The data itself is fine. I ran ripping vs. converting by spoon who said it would be fine to convert and I am confident of that. While converting, I'm tweaking the tags and upgrading the album art in each album folder.

@Teknojkny:
Please look at the lighter side of things and relax. You come off as being angry in your posts. In any of these forums there will always be two sides of the story. Check out the link below. Not that Stereophile is the end all in audio mags, but John Atkinson actually recommends uncompressed codecs for serious audiophiles where space is not a consideration.

http://www.stereophile.com/computeraudio/1008servers/index2.html

[Teknojnky]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

Not angry at all, in fact I find the whole thread quite humorous.

Stereophile is the last place I would look for scientific evidence or opinion, they serve only to further their own agenda (sell ad space).

(edit: ironically, the linked page even agrees with what has already been stated, there is no difference in audio quality between uncompressed and lossless compression).

You go so far as to admit the data is the same, then any auditory differences are in the playback chain and not an artifact of the codec itself.

Instead of being worrying about wave vs flac/etc, perhaps some should be more concerned why the equipment does not play back the same data the same way, if indeed there is any audible, and not imaginary, difference at all.

In any case, I can only hope that all involved do their own proper testing and arrive at a solution which fits their personal needs/desires.

[Son of Odin]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

Many modern CD/DVD drives give better (more accurate) results when ripping at high speed. Even at x4 if AccurateRip says it is accurate and the same at x32 then the exact same data resulted from both rips.

Yes, i agree, this is all logical and there's no argument there.
I still don't know why i get a little better sound at slow speed.
Also,i don't know why and i can't explain why i get a lot better sound when ripping with Millenium cd mat.This difference is not small.
If rip is accurate,then it is accurate,with or without mat.But the difference in sound is large.Both files were reported with no errors (ripped with EAC),so i can't explain it.Except maybe with mat,less error correction was used,and more original data was read from CD.

[Spoon]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

The same applies to your millenium cd mat, with or without it if AccurateRip verifies the rip (with or without) then it is as good as possible, there is simply no way that more original data is read, accuraterip would detect even inaudible errors.

[Son of Odin]

Re: Accurate ripping to WAV

The same applies to your millenium cd mat, with or without it if AccurateRip verifies the rip (with or without) then it is as good as possible, there is simply no way that more original data is read, accuraterip would detect even inaudible errors.

I will try this...
But i am convinced the difference will be audible,even with Accuraterip.
I can't explain it or argue with your logic, as your logic seems correct to me.
I heard the difference CD mat made (without Accuraterip) and that is the only thing on which i base my opinion.
I don't want to start an argue here, so i will try it.
However i will post about my results.
I am going to my friend (with fast internet) to download dbPoweramp now.:D
Then i will install it on my office PC.If no problem occurs,i will have the answer in a week or so