IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
EAC Sound Quality, Superb!
Daryll
post May 4 2003, 15:23
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 2-May 03
Member No.: 6327



Just played some of my music ive ripped using EAC...the sound quality is outstanding!

As some of you know I was using WMP9 to rip, all I can say to the people that suggested I use EAC is, Thank You.

Im only using a SB Audigy and the sound quality easily rivals my NAD 521i CD player, I actually think it beats it!

Clarity is excellent and there is so much more bass than when I ripped with WMP.

It just all together sounds more "hifi" smile.gif

Im just going to leave the files as wav as space is not an issue.

Thank you again biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hanky
post May 4 2003, 15:32
Post #2





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 531
Joined: 18-November 01
From: The Netherlands
Member No.: 481



Audio ripped with EAC (in secure mode) from CDDA to 44.1 kHz 16 bit stereo wav is not better or worse than the original, it's just identical.
You could consider lossless compression of your wav files to enable you to add Artist/Title... info tags to your files, saving some 30 upto 50% storage space and adding some extra file integrity checking, while keeping exactly the original digital quality. Read along the lossless forum section to learn more.

This post has been edited by Hanky: May 4 2003, 15:39
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Daryll
post May 4 2003, 15:37
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 2-May 03
Member No.: 6327



I know its not better than the original.

But it is better than files ripped with WMP & at least as good as what my CD player reproduces.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
honz318712
post May 4 2003, 15:55
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 121
Joined: 20-November 02
Member No.: 3821



QUOTE (Daryll @ May 4 2003 - 06:23 AM)
Clarity is excellent and there is so much more bass than when I ripped with WMP.

It just all together sounds more "hifi" smile.gif

Were you ripping CDs to WAV with WMP? If so then sound quality should have been identical to the original recording. EAC is better because of its secure ripping mode; this ensures proper rips of audio, especially important if the CD has some minor marks or scratches.

If you were indeed ripping to WAV with WMP, and you are also ripping to WAV with EAC, they you definitely would not be hearing “much more bass”. Perhaps you were in reality ripping from CD to WMA with WMP.(Please forgive all these abbreviations)

EAC can give you exact copies. WMP may fail at giving you a secure rip in terms of defects on the disc, or due to a problem with your drive. It will never take away bass, nor will EAC make music sound “more betterer”

You are experiencing the Placebo effect


--------------------
Learn how to setup EAC and Musepack here Download Foobar 2000 here EAC Naming Scheme %N - %T - %C - %A
--quality 5 --xlevel --ape2 --artist "%a" --title "%t" --album "%g" --releasedate "%y" --track "%n" --genre "%m" --comment "rip by HoNz / EAC + mpcenc 1.15r q5" %s %d
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Daryll
post May 5 2003, 10:01
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 2-May 03
Member No.: 6327



I was ripping to WMA lossless with WMP, but surely if it is lossless then it is as good as wav?

Maybe it is the fact that I was not ripping to wav.

Whatever the reason I can garuntee you that the SQ is better ripping to wav with EAC than ripping to WMA lossless with WMP9.

One other thing that may be playing a part is that files ripped with EAC are louder at a given amp level than the WMP9 files are.

Can you determine the reason from that? Its not the Placebo effect, its not subtle enough. There is a big difference.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
user
post May 5 2003, 10:08
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 873
Joined: 12-October 01
From: the great wide open
Member No.: 277



whatever crappy WMP / WMA has done to your copies,
by EAC you are simply safe to get the best out of your CDs, the original.

I recommend you to try www.wavpack.com , wavepack hybrid for storing your waves lossless.
That will save you already a lot space.

perhpas wavepack-hybrid-lossy files are the first step for you into world of lossy compression and still having transparent audio in archival quality.

Or go for MPC,
*

MOD:* No links to or names of ripping groups please.

This post has been edited by Jan S.: Apr 18 2004, 15:05


--------------------
www.High-Quality.ch.vu -- High Quality Audio Archiving Tutorials
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mehrtash
post May 5 2003, 10:20
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (Daryll @ May 5 2003 - 09:01 AM)
One other thing that may be playing a part is that files ripped with EAC are louder at a given amp level than the WMP9 files are.


Do you play both type of files (WMP9 lossless and EAC WAV files) on the same player? Or you
play WMP9 files with WMP and WAV files with Winamp, ...?

I don't have/use WMP9 but I almost definitely claim that the differences in *sound quality* is totally
caused by your player's DSP effects. Try to play your files with a player other than WMP and
make sure all DSP effects are off. I remember that WMP8 had some *destructing* DSP effects
enabled by default. I guess the DSP engine for playing WM files are different with those of other
file types. (Like what Winamp's equalizer do with MP3 files and other file types)

Cheers,
Mehrtash

This post has been edited by mehrtash: May 5 2003, 10:26
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pio2001
post May 5 2003, 12:07
Post #8


Moderator


Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3936
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 73



The volume of the ripped files depends on the "normalization" option. It must be disabled in order to get a lossless copy.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Daryll
post May 5 2003, 23:41
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 2-May 03
Member No.: 6327



I used WMP9 to play both file types..and all DSP & EQ are turned off.

I am also not using normalisation.

It is strange, the only conclusion I could make so far is that the difference was because I was ripping to WMA and not WAV..but this would mean that it is in fact not lossless, however you asure me that it is... blink.gif

What ever the reason, the files ripped with EAC are very noticably better than the ones ripped with WMP9..so ill stick to using EAC.

Thanks again to everyone.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 17th September 2014 - 18:16