Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

[Acer721]

My journey started when I learned that using Windows Media Player to rip my CD's was doing an inferior job. Even though I set it rip at 320kbps, and it says in the data that I was, apparently it wasn't. Someone turned me onto SPEC software to analyze the tracks and that's when I saw the difference. I have been using NCH Express rip CD for the past month and while it does a good job, it is a very limited software. That's what brings me here. I sued This software and it's great! But, when I drop the finished ripped file into spec it's limited, like the wmp rip. I am hoping there is just something in the settings that I can change to remedy this problem.

[Spoon]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

Ripping to mp3? you should not look at frequency plots, as mp3 sacrifices certain frequencies that you cannot hear and puts its data into the frequencies you can hear.

Anyhow to preserve the full frequency plot, on the mp3 Lame page click Advanced and on the Additional CLI paste:

--lowpass -1

[Acer721]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC



ripped the same track using three different software. How do I get NCH results with dBpoweramp? It's just that I have that OCD brain that wants to get the absolute very best MP3 possible. It's probably no big deal. I just wanted to know.

[Spoon]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

3.82 is a older version, sorry we cannot supply old versions of lame, dBpoweramp uses 3.100 which has a higher quality.

I would not use the lowpass option, although it looks better in the audio editor, you do not hear audio with your eyes, 100% certainly the 3.82 and 3.100 with lowpass will be lower quality audio than 3.100 without lowpass.

[Acer721]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

What about 3.100 with and without lowpass option? Will I notice a difference?

[Dat Ei]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

Why not ripping to a lossless codec like flac and to mp3 at the same time? If there will be an even better mp3 codec or mp3 converter in the future you don't have to rip your CDs again - just convert your lossless files again.

Dat Ei

[Acer721]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

Takes up too much space. I have started re-ripping in 320 without bandpass

[GBrown]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

How much space is "too much" space? At 25k lossless tracks I am sitting at just over 1TB. A single drive of 2TB is really not expensive these days. Considering the time it takes to do the ripping in the first place. If you decide to do this again in the future, you will probably kick yourself for not doing it now!

[Acer721]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

what program do you use/recommend, to convert FLAC files to MP3 LAME 3.100 ?

[garym]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

what program do you use/recommend, to convert FLAC files to MP3 LAME 3.100 ?

dbpoweramp converter. The very forum you are on.

[Acer721]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

Oh yeah. Duh. I actually bought the software for the CD ripper and forgot about the converter. On that note, some of the lossless files I DL are in two parts and need to be split into separate tracks. Media Human Audio converter does it automatically. How do I get this converter to do that?

[garym]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

[QUOTE=Acer721;216112]Oh yeah. Duh. I actually bought the software for the CD ripper and forgot about the converter. On that note, some of the lossless files I DL are in two parts and need to be split into separate tracks. Media Human Audio converter does it automatically. How do I get this converter to do that?[/QUOTE

Are you talking about cue files (where an entire album is really only a single audio file, but there is a cue file which separates the tracks)? If so, there are ways to convert these losslessly to separate tracks (not sure about dbpa, but foobar2000 will do this, as will cuetools). But not sure what you mean by a single track having two parts????

[Acer721]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

Yeah, cue files. What I have been doing is using Media Human to break it down to tracks in FLAC and then using this software to convert the tracks to MP3

[Acer721]

Re: Problem in comparison to NCH ripper when using SPEC

Anyone know how to scrub all the add-on tag fields? I tried MP3tagEditor and it does Many things, but someone names PMEDIA is all up in a ton of metadata, section that don't even normally exist.