Ripping CDs Directly To FLAC

Correct. But, to get the job done between working, sleeping, eating, family ect, I had to run two computers simultaneously.

 

I have noticed that both DBpoweramp and iTunes give you an option before you start to rip the CD to check for errors after the CD is copied to the hard drive. DBpoweramp gives you the option to, "After Encoding Verify Written Audio", and iTunes gives you the same option, but worded, "Use error correction when reading audio CDs".

 

iTunes error correction is rubbish. It has bitten many forum members, myself included. I never use iTunes to rip, period.

 

"After Encoding Verify Written Audio" option just verifies the encoding, I use it when converting my needledrop's from WAV to Flac

 

Actually doing the Depeche Mode Singles boxes right now, uhg, what's nice though about DB is being able to click on the arrow by the meta button and choose the correct track list, same for the art, makes doing singles with worldwide releases much easier

 

iTunes has zero ability to verify the rip matches some kind of checksum of known good rips of that CD, which is what EAC and dBPoweramp both do. Without that step you have no idea if the rip is accurate or not. iTunes error correction attempts to make a bit-accurate rip, but there's no validation that it actually succeeded.

Also, the error correction iTunes uses during a rip is far less robust than what EAC and dBPoweramp are capable of. Both of those tools can get clean rips off of discs that choke iTunes.

Given Apple's position in the market, iTunes is really just an embarrassment at this point. A buggy, bloated embarrassment...

 

I've read about some on this forum that still use (and I presume like) iTunes as a player but not a ripper or tagging interface. But for me any player that does not support FLAC is a fail at this late stage. Too bad about that.

 

iTunes does not check for errors after the CD is copied to the hard drive. When you select "Use error correction when reading audio CDs" in iTunes, all that iTunes is doing is turning on an error correction function built into Optical Drives that happens as part of the read/extraction process, not post read/extraction. This error correction is called C2 error correction and is built into nearly all optical drives. C1 error correction is performed by default in an optical drive.

dBpowerAmp, EAC and other accurate rippers can also turn on or off C2, but more importantly, the perform advance error correction beyond C2 capabilities.

 

I agree. FLAC is fast becoming the standard in the lossless music world, like MP3 was in the lossy music world. Apple/iTunes should be realising this now, but I doubt they will back down and will probably stick to their own ALAC lossless format if they start offering lossless downloads, like they stuck with AAC with their lossy downloads. iTunes do however now let you convert your downloaded AAC files to MP3. If iTunes do start offering ALAC downloads (which I think will have to happen soon) maybe they will offer an ALAC to FLAC converter somewhere later on down the line.

Slightly off topic, but it just got me thinking.

 

Why would you ever want to convert one lossy format to another. AAC is not an Apple format and very widely supported. There is no reason in the world to convert from AAC to MP3. People complain about Apple not supporting FlAC, but to same is true for any DAP that doesn't support AAC. Even the Zune supported it.

 

Because your music player may not be compatible with ALAC, such as mine, but it does play FLAC files. That's why some people would convert one lossless format to another. There is no different whatsoever in the sound as I have converted ALAC files to FLAC files and they both had identical sound waves. I had to do this recently when someone sent me some ALAC files.

Yes, AAC is widely supported now, including with my music player, but during the 2000s AAC was mainly compatible with Apple products such as the iPod, when it came to music playback (as opposed to using AAC on digital TV and digital radio broadcasts). I've had four portable music players in my time and only my current one (the fourth) supports AAC. If people have older players like these they may need to convert music purchased on iTunes to MP3. They may also want to create MP3 CDs/DVDs. As far as I know, there's know such thing as an AAC CD/DVD. I personally don't make them anymore as most car stereos (including mine) now allow you to connect your personal music player to them, although it will play MP3 CDs.

 

I'm tickled to death (no, but sort of) that FLAC has found it's way to the very top of the audio world including audiophiles and higher resolution files, not just the 16/44 ones. I am thrilled that it is not owned by one of the big corporations with their plans to limit it, or corrupt it, etc. Apple and Microsoft can sit and look at it and be in awe, and say to themselves "it just works" LOL!

 

Well, Apple has made ALAC freely available too, finally. Unfortunately, too late to head off the rise of FLAC. They should have made it freely available from the start...

 

I'm glad that they missed that boat and will always be chasing the tail of FLAC. I always saw Apple as a sexier more advanced way of doing everything. For two decades I saw it that way. Then I got a Mac laptop to go with my PC laptop, and every time I try and do something, like watch a simple avi video file from a thumb drive, or play a damn CD, I get popups telling me that file not recognized or I am missing something or another on the Mac. iTunes wants to get in the way of music listening, etc. The PC just plays the thing beautifully. Quicktime is good for only a few things imo.

 

Sometimes the error will be audible, and sometimes not. If you're not hearing any problem with any rip made with iTunes, it's likely because you have a very accurate drive, and most rips made in burst mode will come out accurate. The big problem with iTunes though as others have pointed out is that it doesn't tell you when something has gone wrong. You have to listen to every rip to find out. If you're ripping a lot of CD's, that is an extremely inefficient quality-control strategy. Stick with dBpoweramp, which will tell you right away if your drive and discs are producing inaccurate or insecure rips.

 

Flac is literally like Winzip for music files. It does not damage the contents by compressing it all the way, it just leaves a margin of error to constantly compress it at full potential (level 8). Level 5 is default and there is little difference between 5 and 8; stick with default. dbPoweramp has two features you won't find in most freeware programs: full support and a massive amount of extra tools, in addition to Vorbis comment support (very important for editing). Flacs are not supposed to contain true tags since they are container files but instead use Ogg Vorbis comments to write metadata style tags to songs. The extra tools allow you to analyze and create replay gain tags (eub r128), cut track silence for hidden tracks, use filters, set eq values, etc. I think there are 30+ tools in the list. Editing is easy and Musicbrainz will also tag these files. Some people were scared that Musicbrainz was showing it would change the length of a song. Since the file is a container, no changes will be accepted in this field. When you click save, the track length will still be unaltered, so tag away your flacs with Musicbrainz and make fine adjustments with dbPoweramp. The most useful feature of dbPoweramp is the one least mentioned: you can tell it exactly how many processors you want dedicated to your conversions! If your computer has a memory hog program on it or you want to do other tasks while converting, tell it to only use half of your processors. I am using an i7 quad core which actually provides 8 processors. If I use all 8 processors, I can convert a full length album in about 50 seconds. It actually shows each processor usage as it converts and gives you a warning once completed if any errors occurred.

 

Thanks for the clarity, Ham Sandwich.
Just to reclarify my position about CUETools/CUERipper and the need to have it. From what I understand so far, the only benefit for such software above and beyond dBpoweramp/JRiver, is the identifying of HDCD features and being able to rip one track for applying to SoX, instead of many individual files for Pre-emphasis.
As far as Pre-emphasis is concerned for most, one could withstand the simplicity of a single track for SoX application for the rare CD from the 80's.
As far as HDCD, I have yet to have a problem with the need to identify the HDCD features and have ripped many HDCD in 24 bit with dBpoweramp with the added 6dB added. I have yet to have a rip clip. If any problem should be recognized in the future I also back up with the 16 bit copy still encoded HDCD and could easily do a second rip without the added 6dB. I stand that CUETools/CUERipper have no additional benefit over dBpoweramp/JRiver. In fact I would find a CUE rip as a disbenefit, since my collection for storage and playing in JRiver are one and the same, with additional backups of course.

 

I don’t know what your beef is about CUETools/CUERipper, but I have all the programs that you list and still find it to be an essential tool.

CUETools ability to repair ripped files to bit perfect copies of the original image is indispensable. Your statement that your happy repairing files with RX Advanced tells me that you have no idea of the power that restoring to bit perfect copies means.

 

Okay, I'll bite. What do you mean by restoring or repairing a ripped file to bit perfect?? Do you include lost data? To me, bit perfect means identical lossless data, regardless of lossless compression used or separated track files.

 

CUETools not only stores a checksum in its database, it also stores a recovery file which enables you to correct small errors in your rip, in case you have problems ripping a CD. It's absolutely brilliant. It's not "repair" in a sense of making the errors inaudible, it's a true repair that makes the data bit-identical to the CD, as if you had ripped it without errors.

 

I've clearly been on this forum too long - the sarcastic replies are starting to bother me even more than the repeat threads....

 

Got it. Been doing some reading up on CUETools further. About what percentage of CD rips do you estimate this method works? Can you take a ripped file and do the same, without the CD present? Isn't this bordering close to legal issues with copy infringement since your actually taking the database corrected data to replace your corrupted data?
Could this be the reason that dBpoweramp is careful not to implement a similar feature?

 

It works on every CD which has an entry in the CUETools database. When you are able to verify a disc, you are also able to repair it. The specifics depend on the errors themselves, the amount of errors and their clustering.

Yes, you can take a ripped file and repair it, without having the CD, and no, I don't think there are any legal issues, the database does not contain the data itself, the repair file is some kind of sophisticated checksum (I'm not familiar with the technical details).

 

Thanks for the further details.
I'm wincing at this statement.
But for now will withhold from making any additional foggy statement.

 

We need a sticky FAQ that says accurateRip is essential if one considers themselves serious about listening or an audiophile. There really is no question is there.