CD to HDD
Pavel
I get this message when I try to reply via the forum .I will resend the reply to .vitera.com
"Sorry! That user has specified that they do not wish to receive emails through this board. If you still wish to send an email to this user, please contact the administrator and they may be able to help."
SandyK
P.S.
I did not get any advice of more recent replies.
Furthermore, both my drives had been calibrated with the EAC server, and the LG Blu Ray writer was nominated as the better drive.
Pavel
I get this message when I try to reply via the forum .I will resend the reply to .vitera.com
"Sorry! That user has specified that they do not wish to receive emails through this board. If you still wish to send an email to this user, please contact the administrator and they may be able to help."
SandyK
P.S.
I did not get any advice of more recent replies.
Furthermore, both my drives had been calibrated with the EAC server, and the LG Blu Ray writer was nominated as the better drive.
phofman said:
This is of course valid if you look at your two local files.
What if you have a crappy CD?
I also read that it happened that people extracted the same error twice.
To be absolutely sure you need a generic checksum (see Acourate rip).
BTW: Not any large downloadfile comes without md5 checksum.
Cheers
You guys are just spinnimg your wheels.
The trials you are conducting are meaningless.
The only way to deal with this as a consumer is to make a legalistic-type 'balance of probabilities' assessment.
The chances are very high that it's a load of bunk. So high, in fact, that it doesn't meet my criteria for serious investigation. After all, the people proposing it haven't got the wit to devise meaningful trials.
Perhaps a section of the forum should be given over to the amelioration of obsessive-compulsive audio-flaw-fixation disorder.
w
Flying Saucers Have Landed!
The trials you are conducting are meaningless.
The only way to deal with this as a consumer is to make a legalistic-type 'balance of probabilities' assessment.
The chances are very high that it's a load of bunk. So high, in fact, that it doesn't meet my criteria for serious investigation. After all, the people proposing it haven't got the wit to devise meaningful trials.
Perhaps a section of the forum should be given over to the amelioration of obsessive-compulsive audio-flaw-fixation disorder.
w
Flying Saucers Have Landed!
phofman said:
I agree, but the argument was about comparing SQ of two rips. I think we understand each other
Discussing soundquality of two identical rips is even for me a questionable subject.
I wont chime in into such a discussion. ( And I discuss a lot in your eyes "questionable" topics as you know
)And finally I won't rip every CD twice to make a local bit2bit comparision, if I can use Acourate-rip. Using Acourate-rip saved me a great amount of time since I can rip at high-speed.
somthing doesn't add up
So I ripped all my CD collections into flac using EAC with AccurateRip.
When I played it through Media Monkey and comparing the same track from the CD and from HDD, the bit rate shows:
CD: 1411 kbps
HDD: 809 kbps
Questions:
1. Why the bit rate between CD and flac is different if the compressed flac file is "lossless"?
2. If original CD is 16 bit at 44.1khz, playing CD should results in (16 x 44.1) = 705.6 kbps/sec - why is it showing 1411 kbps instead?
3. Should I expect some reduction in sound quality when saving the CD to flac?
4. Should I have saved my 200 CD's in uncompressed WAV format?
So I ripped all my CD collections into flac using EAC with AccurateRip.
When I played it through Media Monkey and comparing the same track from the CD and from HDD, the bit rate shows:
CD: 1411 kbps
HDD: 809 kbps
Questions:
1. Why the bit rate between CD and flac is different if the compressed flac file is "lossless"?
2. If original CD is 16 bit at 44.1khz, playing CD should results in (16 x 44.1) = 705.6 kbps/sec - why is it showing 1411 kbps instead?
3. Should I expect some reduction in sound quality when saving the CD to flac?
4. Should I have saved my 200 CD's in uncompressed WAV format?
John
Save your EAC rips as .wav files.
If you want to try something that won't cost too much money, try dampening the support metal work where the CD/DVD writers and HDD writers are mounted, with strips of self adhesive felt.
Also fit a strip or 2 of self adhesive felt to your ripping CD/DVD drive to dampen noise and vibrations from fans, HDDs etc, and more importantly , from INTERNAL vibrations of the drive itself.
Just make sure that cooling is not compromised. This will give a small improvement in playback quality,and another improvement that I won't go into at the moment.
SandyK
Save your EAC rips as .wav files.
If you want to try something that won't cost too much money, try dampening the support metal work where the CD/DVD writers and HDD writers are mounted, with strips of self adhesive felt.
Also fit a strip or 2 of self adhesive felt to your ripping CD/DVD drive to dampen noise and vibrations from fans, HDDs etc, and more importantly , from INTERNAL vibrations of the drive itself.
Just make sure that cooling is not compromised. This will give a small improvement in playback quality,and another improvement that I won't go into at the moment.
SandyK
Re: Re: Re: somthing doesn't add up
Trust us lossless means lossless. There is NO question about quality or accuracy. Wavs also can not be labeled with tags. It can be quite messy ripping with wavs only. I tried this once for completely different reasons and I do not recommend it unless you absolutely have to.
MJL21193 said:
Trust us lossless means lossless. There is NO question about quality or accuracy. Wavs also can not be labeled with tags. It can be quite messy ripping with wavs only. I tried this once for completely different reasons and I do not recommend it unless you absolutely have to.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.