 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hopefully I'm not duplicated an already existing thread.
My PC up and died on me there recently so I'm reassessing the software and method that I use to rip my CDs.
I was just wondering what programmes y'all out there use for ripping CDs and what crazy settings (bitrates, file formats, etc) you apply to the process.
I used to use CDex (pretty sure its all I've used since I started ripping many moons ago), and encoded the files in MP3 at a VBR between 128 and 320.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've gone through various computers and apps over the years, but I've always stuck with the mp3 format. These days I use iTunes for Windows to rip my CDs.
I honestly think that an mp3 made at 160 kbps sounds just like the CD, and I still encode pop music at that setting.
A few years ago I switched to 192 kbps for film music CDs because they're "important." I don't know if it's overkill or I'm really getting something more preserved, but why take chances? One thing I'm sure of is that in a blind taste test, I would not be able to tell a 192 kbps mp3 from a lossless file. And my ears aren't getting any younger, so I'm confident I won't regret my 192 setting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 17, 2013 - 2:02 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
I used iTunes for ripping my CD's and I just accepted their standard modus -- whatever that is. To be perfectly honest, they sound fine. I've never understood the 'flac'/lossless obsession, as the difference is minimal to my ears -- besides, the format is difficult to play and takes up a lot of space.
Pretty weak excuse these days. Who doesn't want a perfect copy of their music on their computer.
I rip to FLAC using dppower amp with accurate rip or Jriver 19, whichever can get me the proper metadata.
If you have a good sound-setup, you can tell the difference.
Meh....
I have a good sound set-up, but I don't really care about such minute details. The sound is pretty damn good even if it's ripped in normal rates.
If I want a Super Deluxe Hi Fi Hyper-Detailed Experience, I'll put on a CD. But to be perfectly honest, even then the difference is minimal. I grew up with cassettes, so for me both CD's and a decent mp3 rip are unproblematic! Besides, the time for intent listening has passed for me (after I got tinnitus). Now music is always playing at lower volumes in the background while I'm on the computer etc.
But to each their own, as they say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Sep 17, 2013 - 2:12 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
But to each their own, as they say.
Indeed.
But all I have to say is that until you've heard a decent high end setup (Preamp, Amp, DAC, Good Speakers), you just don't know you're missing.
Oh, I have an excellent set-up, no worries. And my father has an even crazier High End system for several tens of thousands of dollars. But unfortunately, the tinnitus prevents me from getting the ultimate sonic experience I could get years ago, so that aspect has become less important. A regular, standard iTunes rip is more than good enough for my use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
