Tweet
CD Ripper Speeds
Years ago the common practice was to rip CD's at the slower speeds (2x 4x) for best accuracy. Is that unnecessary now with AccurateRip and the like? I have 2 disc drives for ripping. On my Buffalo Media Desktop Disc Writer I rip at 4x but on my HP PC Computer's Disc Drive 10x is the slowest speed shown. I got it to rip at slower speeds before but cannot remember the steps I had to take to achieve this. No such problems with the Buffalo Disc Writer as many speeds are accessible.
-
-
Not necessary any longer, because of AccurateRip and other things. And in many cases, slowing the speed of a drive can be WORSE for ripping. Spoon (the dbpoweramp creator) often tells folks on this forum to not slow down ripping speeds. -
Thanks for the info!
I ripped CD's for many years using Jriver and have switched to dBpoweramp a couple of years ago. This will save me a lot of time. Would you recommend 10x or Max then?Comment
-
I will go with max then. I found the Absolute Sound article that recommended slower speeds and it was 2011 so that was ancient history, lol.
Ripping HDCD encoded discs I use the DSP/HDCD application without the 6 db boost. I am assuming this to be the best practice? Any advice appreciated.
Thanks for all the help and really enjoying dBpoweramp.
Comment
-
I rip my HDCD discs without the HDCD DSP (so I have a bit perfect digital copy, even if I want to modify an additional copy). And in cases where PE is actually a feature used in the HDCD CD I can create a separate copy converting the original files using the HDCD DSP (often HDCD features are not actually used. For example Grateful Dead releases of last 10 years, that are HDCD but don't use the Peak Extension feature, thus no reason to treat it like an HDCD). HDCD can be a complicated subject (particularly with all the "HDCD" disks that don't really use the features). See for example
p.s. be very careful of what you believe from Absolute Sound. A number of years ago they had an article that tried to convince people that a WAV file created on Windows vs. Mac, or even different Windows operating systems *sounded* different, despite the fact that they readily admitted that the different WAV files were *bit perfect* copies of each other. This is trivial to show. So in other words, complete *audiophool* nonsense. Buyer beware.
Comment
-
A good post on HDCD from a very knowledgeable digital music person
Comment
-
Hadn't heard this one but does not surprise me. Thanks for the heads-up.I rip my HDCD discs without the HDCD DSP (so I have a bit perfect digital copy, even if I want to modify an additional copy). And in cases where PE is actually a feature used in the HDCD CD I can create a separate copy converting the original files using the HDCD DSP (often HDCD features are not actually used. For example Grateful Dead releases of last 10 years, that are HDCD but don't use the Peak Extension feature, thus no reason to treat it like an HDCD). HDCD can be a complicated subject (particularly with all the "HDCD" disks that don't really use the features). See for example
p.s. be very careful of what you believe from Absolute Sound. A number of years ago they had an article that tried to convince people that a WAV file created on Windows vs. Mac, or even different Windows operating systems *sounded* different, despite the fact that they readily admitted that the different WAV files were *bit perfect* copies of each other. This is trivial to show. So in other words, complete *audiophool* nonsense. Buyer beware.Comment
Comment