Best CD Ripper for Mac?

dauber said:

Okay, that must be a new thing....

What kind of error protection is it, and how accurate is it?? Anything like...


??

Click to expand...

Nope, been there since I got my iPod 4G in 2004! The ripper in iTunes is actually one of the best audio software codecs out there. All rippers/MP3 management software has it's advantages and disadvantages. iTunes main problem is that it's a pretty heavy-weight program (not so much for Mac, but the PeeCee version is a hog), BUT it works well. I've used them all, WinAmp, Amarok, iTunes, Kaffeine, Windows Media, etc etc, iTunes feels like the most complete balance of common sense features and technical wizardry. I like Amaroks ability to use a SQL style database to keep track of your MP3s, and flexibility of formats, kinda the same deal with Kaffeine. It's disadvantage is adding songs can be bothersome and cumbersome and it does not have album cover art databases like iTunes has. WinAmp is quick, but is easily corrupted and you lose files constantly, the EQs are great in this one too. Windows Media is pretty lightweight, but it totally ignores some formats, not even a friendly "Oh Hi, can I convert that for you?" iTunes has a great data-basing setup using XML files, 3-way interface feel (coverflow, text, and that new thingy ma jig), is friendly to MOST formats and if not it will convert MOST (FLAC support is a must Apple, wake up!). The iTunes store is massive and pretty quick considering what it is. Things iTunes bombs on, storing duplicate files on Macs (even when you delete them it puts them back, weird), hiding a lot of IMPORTANT power-user features; a sub note on that, some times when they update they change the contextual menus where you manage these features and you have to search them out again. Soundcheck is a lame duck too, it never works as it claims it should, you still have volume issues with older songs vs. newer songs (everything is squashed and back nowadays, lay off the compressor mastering houses, I like dynamics). Other things that make iTunes rock, using your iPod Touch/iPhone as a remote, Airtunes if you have an AP Express, album art database, ease of adding art to MP3s, the multitude of formats you can convert CDs into, Genius playlists, library sharing over local networks, ease of use with network drives, and finally the visualizers they choose are always sooo sweet.

Okay, sorry to resurrect this old thread, but I finally have a point to make about EAC....which I wish I could figure out how to get working via emulation...

I've been looking for a CD copy of Walter Horton's Live at the Knickerbocker. It's available for download on both iTunes and Amazon, but I want a lossless copy. The CD is out of print, and the only place I could find it was Amazon, where someone was trying to sell a used copy for three digits. (ouch!!!)

Well...after looking further, I found out that there's a British pressing of the CD, but under a different title -- Little Boy Blue -- which was also out of print...however, I found someone selling it for like $10, so I bought it. I got it on Monday, but much to my chagrin, my trusty MacBook would barely touch it because it was all scratched up. iTunes took several hours to try to import it, and even then most of the songs were only partial. I tried Max, which wouldn't even touch it. Playing it resulted in about two seconds of playable music per track. My PC recognized it but wouldn't play it, my regular CD player didn't even recognize it. Car CD player wouldn't touch it, portable CD player played a few seconds of it.

So....just for laughs, I wanted to see if Exact Audio Copy had enough error correction power to rip it. I tossed the CD into my PC and in about ten minutes it ripped a copy and reported zero errors. I found that suspicious, so I listened to every second of each WAV it ripped...all were PERFECT.

Could it have been perhaps a drive issue? Maybe, but chances of that are slim....

My thought is that many CD rippers try to do it as quickly as possible, whereas EAC is concerned only with exact replication. Also, yes, some optical drives are more forgiving than others.

My advice? Check into one of these if you buy a lot of used media:

Amazon.com: SkipDr 10183 00 Classic Disc Repair System: Electronics

It might look like a gimmick, but they actually work quite well, completely resurfacing the disc.

Hmmm....looks like a nice piece of equipment to have for not too much money...I know between my wife and me we probably have a dozen or so CDs that are partly unplayable...just might check it out. Thanks!

I have one that's about 5 years old and it still works like a champ. It's basically just a grinding/polishing wheel and some distilled water to spray on it for lubrication. They have a motorized version too.

Basically, all of the actual data on the disc is beneath several MM of clear plastic. So, the Scratch Doctor just grinds and polishes a bit of that plastic off to remove the scratches.

Brandon said:

... If you are going to rip as an mp3 file, which is already a lossy format, encoding at the highest sample rate will result in higher quality. If you are ripping as .wav, then yes, ripping at a higher sample rate than the original CD is pointless and will only take up more disc space.

Click to expand...

This is not true. If you were encoding an analog signal source, a higher sample rate would result in a higher fidelity capture, but not necessarily higher quality. More characteristics of the source might be reproduced (imperfections in LP vinyl, coloring by speaker cone / driver dynamics).

Generally speaking, in encoding a 44.1kHz digital source, wherein there simply is not more than 44,100 samples in a given second, audio frames would either be transposed or dropped depending on the target parameters.

Encoding at a higher bitrate simply adds data, duplicating existing audio frames. The result might certainly sound DIFFERENT than 44.1khz, but not any better.

You are aware that you are posting to a 1 year + old thread? ;D

McYukon said:

You are aware that you are posting to a 1 year + old thread? ;D

Click to expand...

Actually it's a 3 year old thread, and you and I are posting to it as well

Brucew0617 said:

I just use the Windows system and rip CD with WMP, I think as Mac the best pne is still iTunes, right?

Click to expand...

"Best" is pretty subjective. Yes, iTunes is one of many ways to rip a CD on a Mac.

cwa107 said:

"Best" is pretty subjective. Yes, iTunes is one of many ways to rip a CD on a Mac.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Best to one person is not always best to another. I use iTunes to rip and it works great. If I want high quality I just use Apple Lossless.

Some prefer LAME though and there is a way to make iTunes use LAME.

I'm amazed people still rip to MP3. How very 90s.

chas_m said:

I'm amazed people still rip to MP3. How very 90s.

Click to expand...

Agreed actually. Like I said Apple Lossless if I am picky and AAC for less demanding stuff. Only MP3's I have are from way back when or from Amazon store since that is the only format they have there.

Better yet, why doesn't Apple get with the program and support FLAC?

FLAC and Apple Lossless are both Lossless formats. I agree I wish there was built in support for FLAC for the few I work with, but there is a plug in for iTunes and for sure one for OGG.