Domain: chrismyden.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to chrismyden.com.
Comments · 6
-
Skip Doctor
This seems to work.
-
Re:cdparanoia
You can learn more than you ever wanted to know about ripping discs from the guys at Chris Myden/UberNet. Not that I would ever have anything to do with such a network, that being illegal and such.
-
ABX test.
Do an ABX test (http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/ab
x _testing.htm) comparing a MP3 extracted with EAC and encoded with Lame 3.93 --alt preset standard and a wav file.
Come back to me with the results.
I think you will be suprised.
99% of the population can't tell a difference.
http://www.chrismyden.com/nuke/modules.php?op=modl oad&name=Elite_DAE&file=painless for an easy guide.
MP3s are not only smaller, they work on portables, and they have great metadata.
Regardless of your decision regarding encoding or not - EAC is a must for a quality extraction! -
Re:MD5 HashMany people will produce a file by ripping straight from a CD, which , given the same CD, will result in an identical source file.
No!! That's definately not true. Making a perfect rip is something you have to WORK at, which not many rippers do. Especially years ago. Check out ChrisMyDen's Uber Network on a detailed guide on how to make the 'perfect mp3'.
You need to use something like EAC's secure mode. It rips the cd twice and compares for exactness. Only then can you be assured your wav file has no errors.
Even if you can convince people to use the best mp3 encoding techniques (LAME 3.92 or LAME 3.90.2 -aps) I have still seen people refuse to use EAC, instead enjoying cdex, audiograbber, or (gasp) jukebox due to 'ease of use'. These ripper DO NOT make perfect rips, and will almost always make a different wav file each time due to the way it tries to make error corrections. Most people will not ditch their source either, even if there are errors. And everyone has a different scratch on their cd's.
Almost everyone encodes at 128kbps
This isn't true anymore either. Considering most of the lazy people out there download mp3's instead of make their mp3's, many of the rippers today do care about quality, and will rip in VBR or at 192. Release groups (where I would imagine most of the new stuff originates nowadays will rip at 192, 224, 256, or 320)
-
Re:What account?Well, you bring up another trend, even if you didn't mean to:
Private networks. With DirectConnect, anyone can set up their own P2P network with their trusted peers. UberNode is an example of private networks that trade only LAME -alt preset standard mp3's with complete tagging, etc. Set up for quality. They used to be quite open, but have now gone slightly underground.
The downside of private networks, of course, is the smaller selection of files. (thousands instead of millions) but the security goes up. Not only that, but you're under the radar for RIAA concerns.
-
MP3's dont have to mean low sound quality
Mp3 doesn't have to mean lower audio quality. A lot of tests have been done by audiophiles and mp3's encoded correctly are indistinguishable from the wave files even for most audiophiles. In a lot of cases mp3's are better than ogg's as the LAME mp3 encoder has been tuned at high bitrates to ensure good audio quality while ogg format is only now being tuned at high quality settings. See hydrogenaudio for info on various codecs, chrismyden for info on how to create high quality mp3's and Ubershare for info on how to share your high quality mp3's, ogg's, MPC's with other people who only share high quality files. And until there are some descent harddisk players with ogg support most of us will keep trading mp3's because they are more useful. In the only real advantage that makes me want to use ogg's is the fact that they support gappless playback, which is still lacking in all the harddisk mp3 players.