Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

[we_doyle]

I just asked about this, but members here may know the answer.

I have a huge (1500 plus discs maybe)collection of CD's that I ripped using Windows Media Player, probably mostly with Windows XP and the version of Windows Media Player would have been whatever I had at the time. As you would guess, it was a big project, but I had the cover art and it was all there.

Fast forward to now, and having gone from XP to 7 to 8.0 and to Windows 8.1, I now call up my collection and find that many CD's are shown as "Unknown". Even album art comes up labeled "Unknown". So, I might recognize a cover and see it under "Unknown". It appears that in many instances, one tract will be "Unknown" and the rest of the tracks will be named.

One option is to redo the entire project. However, I have seen postings that tell me your software might be able to go in and repair what I have. If that is so, I do not mind buying your software. It would be money well spent. If it is better than Windows Media Player by leaps and bounds (I would hope so), that is all the better.

When you search for this kind of software on the Internet, every software that comes up proclaims that it is great, fabulous, etc. I have done trials for a few and found that they suck. I hope you understand when I seem skeptical. If your software will fix my database of ripped CD's and/or ease my efforts to fix it, and outperform Windows Media Player down the road, I would love to buy it.

So, please respond.

[Spoon]

Re: Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

PerfectTUNES will not update missing tags, but it can find missing art, assuming the files are tagged correctly.

[we_doyle]

Re: Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

OK. Right now, I am facing the possibility of having to rip all these CD's again. Although many are fine, the most efficient way to do this might be to just rip them all a second time. I would grab about 50 at a time and sit and feed them to my computer while I did other things. However, if I could know which ones have problems and just rip them a second time, my job would be much easier (I think). For example, if 100 discs have problems, I just find them and rip them again and I am done. While redoing the whole collection can be done somewhat on autopilot when I would be at the computer anyway, I would prefer to save time. Also, I am not enamored of Windows Media Player at this point. I am assuming that I would buy the whole package from dbpoweramp and so if another program in the package would help, I would use it too.

So, given my situation, what do you the readers think? Should I buy this program (all of the components)? Also, by way of clarification, should I buy this program, am I still probably going to find it easier to just rip the entire collection again?

[Dat Ei]

Re: Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

Hey we_doyle,

first forget about Windows Media Player. It is the source of but not the solution for problems. Its pseudo intelligent way to manipulate your files isn't what will lead you into a safe haven.

With a software like dBpa you rip your CDs once and that's it as long as you take care of backup and things like this. dBpa gives you the feedback if you're rip was successful. You rip your data to a lossless format and from now on you can convert your music to the needs of the platforms you want to use. No need to re-rip. One thing you have to do is to take care of your metadata: for most CDs to rip you get them from online databases, but you have to check them nevertheless. After the the rip you can take care of the metadata, correct them, complete them etc. pp.

I have started to use dBpa in spring 2014. In less than 3 month I have ripped my collection of more than 2.000 CDs. My digitized collection has now a quality it never had before and still improves from week to week.


Dat Ei

[garym]

Re: Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

Agree. I've ripped over 5,000 CDs with dbpa. I wouldn't let Windows Media Player touch my files (it is practically like a virus in the problems it can create with metadata (tags), artwork, etc. If you want a good windows based music player (after you've done your ripping to LOSSLESS (e.g., FLAC)), then I recommend foobar2000 or WINAMP or maybe J.River Media.

[PepsiCan]

Re: Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

I just asked about this, but members here may know the answer.

I have a huge (1500 plus discs maybe)collection of CD's that I ripped using Windows Media Player, probably mostly with Windows XP and the version of Windows Media Player would have been whatever I had at the time. As you would guess, it was a big project, but I had the cover art and it was all there.

Fast forward to now, and having gone from XP to 7 to 8.0 and to Windows 8.1, I now call up my collection and find that many CD's are shown as "Unknown". Even album art comes up labeled "Unknown". So, I might recognize a cover and see it under "Unknown". It appears that in many instances, one tract will be "Unknown" and the rest of the tracks will be named.

One option is to redo the entire project. However, I have seen postings that tell me your software might be able to go in and repair what I have. If that is so, I do not mind buying your software. It would be money well spent. If it is better than Windows Media Player by leaps and bounds (I would hope so), that is all the better.

When you search for this kind of software on the Internet, every software that comes up proclaims that it is great, fabulous, etc. I have done trials for a few and found that they suck. I hope you understand when I seem skeptical. If your software will fix my database of ripped CD's and/or ease my efforts to fix it, and outperform Windows Media Player down the road, I would love to buy it.

So, please respond.

When ripping your CDs to a file archive, in my view you need three things.
1) The rips need to be to a lossles format. That means, WAV, AIFF, Apple Losless (ALAC), FLAC or WMA Lossles (note that most WMA formats are not lossles). My guess is that using Windows Media Player forced you to rip to WAV or WMA.
2) The rips need to be bitperfect. In other words, you want an exact copy. How do you verify that? Using the accurate rip database. And Windows Media Player does not have that, nor does iTunes. Based on this criterium alone, I suggest to redo the project.
3) You need a file format that has an open, standardised, accepted metadata structure that is part of the file format. WMA has such a structure but it is not open, WAV and AIFF do not support metadata standard. So, this leaves you with ALAC, FLAC or WMA. And in my personal opinion WMA is on its way out as with Windows 10, we have standard support for FLAC. Hence, if you live in the Apple world, rip to ALAC, if you live in Windows or Unix/Linux, rip to FLAC.

With regards to why you have the errors without knowing the file format, WAV does not hold metdata in a standardised format. For example, Windows Media Player will store the metadata in a separate database. If you don't migrate that.... A similar thing for the various WMA versions. All have different metadata structures and only one version is truly lossles.

In terms of what would work:
1) Rippers --> DBPowerAmp or EAC. The one is free, the other is user friendlier and more rounded (better accuraterip support, integration with Windows, ability to batch convert with a few clicks). Your choice. I chose DBA because it is easy to get going and allows for easy conversion to any sensible format. One of the thing you will find yourself doing is rip to an archive library. And from that library make copies into other formats as and when you need them. For example, FLAC for your stereo but MP4 for your iTunes.
2) Metadata managers. The version 2.0 of PerfectTunes can do that. Other alternative is MP3Tag for the Windows platform. Haven't found anything yet for Mac and Linux.
3) Playback of ripped files. Not WMP because the current version does not play FLAC or ALAC. Also, WMP uses the Windows Mixer and you want to bypass that. Best choice: Foobar2000.

Maybe not the answer you were hoping for, but perhaps it gives some insight.

[we_doyle]

Re: Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

I am getting some good responses. I may have to do another (massive) rip. I have most of the discs, and so that will be possible, although tedious. However, I like the idea of having the collection done right once and for all. Then I can back it up a bunch of times. FYI to all who read, I made the rips in WAV form with Windows Media Player. I did discover EAC too late and have done some that way. However, they are pretty much all WAV and Windows Media Player has managed to harm the collection. I would note that I once discovered or seemed to discover that it made a difference if I did rips on different computers, even though both were Windows XP. I say this because later I compared rips of the same thing on two different computers (I know this because I did the rips myself) and noticed that what should have been the very same thing was not according to a program I used to compare groups of files.

[garym]

Re: Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

I am getting some good responses. I may have to do another (massive) rip. I have most of the discs, and so that will be possible, although tedious. However, I like the idea of having the collection done right once and for all. Then I can back it up a bunch of times. FYI to all who read, I made the rips in WAV form with Windows Media Player. I did discover EAC too late and have done some that way. However, they are pretty much all WAV and Windows Media Player has managed to harm the collection. I would note that I once discovered or seemed to discover that it made a difference if I did rips on different computers, even though both were Windows XP. I say this because later I compared rips of the same thing on two different computers (I know this because I did the rips myself) and noticed that what should have been the very same thing was not according to a program I used to compare groups of files.

Even with nonsecure rippers (i.e., rippers *other* than programs like dbpa, EAC, cuetools), most rips of most CDs are probably secure. In your case, in comparing WAV files ripped on different machines, if you were comparing CRCs or MD5 files from the different files, they could be different NOT because the audio is different but because the tagging, or tag padding, or embedded artwork was different. This said, I'd take PepsiCan's excellent advice and rerip using a secure ripper to FLAC or ALAC.

Also, you may be able to keep from reripping all the files. You could convert the WAV files to FLAC or ALAC with db file converter (or foobar2000). You can do this with a batch job. Then you can use PERFECTTUNES to compare the resulting rips to the AccuarteRip database. If you get a match, then you don't need to rerip, as your files are bit perfect as confirmed by the AR database. Then again, if the metadata is a mess, you might want to rerip anyhow. How many CDs are we talking about? A few hundred, or many thousands?

[we_doyle]

Re: Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

Maybe 1500 Cd's. Anything to cut down on labor is great.

[garym]

Re: Should I buy Software quality compared to Windows Media Player

Maybe 1500 Cd's. Anything to cut down on labor is great.

I'd probably use perfecttunes to check my WAV rips for AR match and not redo the ripping on those that matched. You can clean up the tags and even automate this if you file names and subdirectory contain things like track name, number, artist name, album name, etc.

You can also use the dbpa "convert to" step and "convert" to "calculate audio CRC" DSP and this will give the the audio CRC of a file that you can compare to the audio CRC of another copy of the same file. This is not affected by tagging or artwork.