IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Reasons to switch to EAC from foobar or winamp for ripping., was: "why is EAC the best?"
Engelsstaub
post Sep 7 2010, 08:53
Post #26





Group: Members
Posts: 566
Joined: 16-February 10
Member No.: 78200



QUOTE (greynol @ Sep 6 2010, 15:02) *
QUOTE (Engelsstaub @ Sep 6 2010, 01:46) *
dBp's advantage is that it is easier to maintain and a bit more novice-friendly.

While I think dBpoweramp has some superior attributes to and refinement over EAC, I do not agree with this idea that it is easier to maintain and is novice-friendly. I once counted the number of settings related to secure ripping and EAC had fewer.


dBpoweramp (one page and ten minutes of my personal time/experience:) http://www.dbpoweramp.com/cd-ripper-setup-guide.htm

EAC (blowfish's guide OR the one at HA here:) http://www.dbpoweramp.com/cd-ripper-setup-guide.htm

(and here:) http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...C_configuration

(and here:) http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=EAC_Options

I'm certain I'm missing something. Compression options, configuration, drive options (configuration,) gap-settings, ...

The guide provided here looks admittedly less confusing and time-consuming as the Blowfish guide. I used the Blowfish guide because I was not participating in HA at the time.

The last straw for me was when EAC started losing my settings that I'd had to spend a half an afternoon configuring. Imagine ripping one CD. Going to get something to eat. Coming back to rip another and VOILA! Timing errors, switched to burst mode, etc.

Off topic? "why is EAC the best? was the title of the original poster. I thought I'd tell him or her why I thought it was not "the best." I tried to be fair in spite of my "zeal."

Not sure why the whole thread didn't go to the trash. Anyway...


--------------------
The Loudness War is over. Now it's a hopeless occupation.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Sep 7 2010, 18:38
Post #27





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10037
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



EAC can be operated at the default settings and work perfectly well. We only recommend that perhaps two or three be changed which are practically non-essential (EDIT: Of those we "recommend" in the wiki, I actually only agree to deviate on one that is not solely based on user preference: use of null samples on CRC calculations; the rest are perfectly fine). Total time configuring is easily less than 10 minutes (perhaps less than 5). Each program has tests that can be performed to in order to choose the proper settings. Each program has settings buried in multiple places (more than one executable in the case of dBpa). Each program has caveats. At least EAC has float-over help to explain each setting.

Regarding posts going in the trash, read TOS #7. FWIW the post I think you're whining about wasn't from this thread.

This post has been edited by greynol: Sep 7 2010, 20:02


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Engelsstaub
post Sep 8 2010, 06:36
Post #28





Group: Members
Posts: 566
Joined: 16-February 10
Member No.: 78200



QUOTE (greynol @ Sep 7 2010, 12:38) *
EAC can be operated at the default settings and work perfectly well. We only recommend that perhaps two or three be changed which are practically non-essential (EDIT: Of those we "recommend" in the wiki, I actually only agree to deviate on one that is not solely based on user preference: use of null samples on CRC calculations; the rest are perfectly fine). Total time configuring is easily less than 10 minutes (perhaps less than 5). Each program has tests that can be performed to in order to choose the proper settings. Each program has settings buried in multiple places (more than one executable in the case of dBpa). Each program has caveats. At least EAC has float-over help to explain each setting.

Regarding posts going in the trash, read TOS #7. FWIW the post I think you're whining about wasn't from this thread.


Yes, it was. I apologize. I also posted the same link (to the dBp guide) twice; again where I meant to post an EAC one. I was being a bonehead and reading to many posts in too many tabs.

I read TOS 7 and do acknowledge your authority here. I should resolve to be more passive as I'm certain you know a lot more about these things than I do. I also resolve to stay away from EAC vs. dBpoweramp-type threads on HA. Even if they are polls. I have made up my mind on this matter. There's really no need for me to evangelize others. The end result from an EAC rip is certainly not inferior to that of dBp. That's what really matters.

Have you ever had the problems with the settings getting reset or whatever? When I used it I was pretty meticulous about maintaining and backing up the cfg file.

(Also sorry about the other thread regarding Wumpscut CDs. I should have vented that elsewhere.)


--------------------
The Loudness War is over. Now it's a hopeless occupation.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Sep 8 2010, 07:12
Post #29





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10037
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



It's alright. I think dBpoweramp is deserving of high praise and recommendations when they are requested. Debate about software is more than welcome as well. As I said in the other discussion that I linked, it's a beautiful thing to have choices. Sometimes one program can get the job done when another can't.

About EAC losing config information, I've never had that problem, but I know that if the program crashes after you've configured it then the information won't get saved to the registry. I'm aware that people have had problems with cfg files not being compatible with newer versions, though.


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
memomai
post Sep 8 2010, 07:51
Post #30





Group: Members
Posts: 264
Joined: 13-February 05
From: Germany, Kempten
Member No.: 19808



can someone post a link where it's explained why the secure modes of EAC do reduce the drive's lifetime?
thanks.


--------------------
FB2K,APE&LAME
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Sep 8 2010, 07:59
Post #31





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10037
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



Common sense should dictate, though there seems to be a misconception/lack of understanding/erroneous assumptions/whatever on the part of Light-Fire when he made his comments about this (in addition to those which have been already been corrected).

Depending on your drive EAC does not necessarily have to request reading of 6MB of data to extract 2MB of audio.

In the case where EAC is configured to read 6MB of data to extract 2MB of audio, how does this not put more wear and tear on your drive than simply telling your drive to read 2MB of data to extract 2MB of audio?

This post has been edited by greynol: Sep 8 2010, 08:02


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
memomai
post Sep 8 2010, 10:12
Post #32





Group: Members
Posts: 264
Joined: 13-February 05
From: Germany, Kempten
Member No.: 19808



there could have been also other reasons but using unneccessary predefined data containers, but thanks for the professional answer.

This post has been edited by memomai: Sep 8 2010, 10:13


--------------------
FB2K,APE&LAME
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Sep 8 2010, 17:19
Post #33





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10037
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



I'm not a professional, but thanks. My usage of the terms data and audio is somewhat contrived to better illustrate the simple point that EAC will ask the drive to read extra audio data in order to flush your drive's buffer (assuming it uses it for audio) in addition to reading the audio data yet again to make the secure comparison (assuming that you aren't relying on C2 pointers).


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd October 2014 - 10:08