|
|
Welcome to the Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis. |
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).
|
|
Thread Tools |
Guide to Proper Lossless Rips
Copied from one place and then to another, and now it returns to its origin.
Ripping Guide How to use Exact Audio Copy Download EAC from here: exactaudiocopy.org Before installing EAC you will probably want to install an ASPI layer for your computer. If your machine has SCSI hardware, and/or built in CD burner, get the one from Adaptec here. (Note: Although there are newer versions; I do not recommend them. They screwed up my computer; and some other people's; they might do the same to yours. The older version is more reliable.) If you have Firewire or a USB/USB2 external burner you will want to use the ASPI from Nero (copy this file to the system32 folder on your computer or put it in the directory where you install EAC and reboot). (See attachment: winaspi32.rar) Required EAC Settings: Menu Action:
Required EAC Options: Extraction tab:
General tab:
Tools tab:
Normalize tab:
Filename tab:
Required Drive Options: Extraction Method tab:
Offset/Speed tab:
Ripping and creation of CUE sheet:
Don't forget to check the CRCs after each rip, because unlike other errors they do not generate a There were errors message (the log doesn't warn you). The Test CRC and the Read CRC should be the same. - Encoding with FLAC [/b] FLAC is a great lossless encoder, arguably the best. Generally what we go for when it comes to encoding wavs into lossless files is how small we can get the files, but then again how quickly they will decode when we want to play them in our favorite audio players. FLAC does both well. Download FLAC 1.1.2 for Windows (tools only) EAC options (F9), tab "tools" (example settings):
EAC compression options (F11), tab "External Compression" (example settings):
Example of an EAC log from an Accurately Ripped CD
Using AccurateRip AccurateRip may or may not necessary depending on how your'e doing your rips. If you're following this guide entirely and ripping CDs using the Test/Copy method in Secure mode, AccurateRip isn't needed. If you're not doing a Test before you Copy or using a mode besides Secure, AccurateRip is for you since you probably want to be sure that your rip is actually accurate.
If you're having trouble with AccurateRip (I have in the past) check the FAQ at the bottom of this post. You can get AccurateRip here. Burning Guide Making 1:1 copies (coming soon) Backing up as data FNAQ (Frequently Not Asked Questions) Q: What if the first track has a pre-gap of more than 2.00 seconds and/or a start of more than 0.00 seconds? A: If you have the most recent version of EAC you don't have to worry about this. You can continue to read if you like. 95% of all CDs have a first-track pregap of exactly 2.00 seconds. In the rare case that they do not, 95% of these CDs have a silent pregap -- there is no audio data contained. However, it is difficult to be sure that this extra pregap time is entirely silent. Newer versions of Exact Audio Copy account for pre-gaps of this type with a special setting in its noncompliant cuesheets (which you generate before ripping); HOWEVER, not all pre-gaps are entirely silent. That said, if you download a rip that doesn't have have the pregap ripped, there's a 99% chance that you can still burn a 1:1 copy (entirely identical to the original CD) with such a rip, but there is still a slim chance that the extra pre-gap isn't silent and that audio data was thus NOT ripped and you CAN'T burn a 1:1 copy with the rip. That said, if you are a true audiophile and perfectionist, you should not automatically discredit the lossless-ness of a download that doesn't have the extra pregap explicitly ripped. However, if YOU are ripping a CD with a pregap of more than 2.00 seconds, you should take a few extra minutes to rip the pregap properly: This is a specific case where the first track has been given a silent pregap. This is very common on classical CDs. On any normal CD, the first track should have a pregap of exactly 2.00 seconds. If this is off, a specific ripping procedure must take place. Example:
If you later want to burn this rip to make a 1:1 copy, you'll need a utility like foobar to combine all of the tracks into a single WAV file and then use the Image CUEsheet to burn it in Exact Audio Copy. Q: AccurateRip is being buggy and shit; it's not working as it should when EAC is running. A: First:
Q: But what happens if I don't... ??? A: I'm including this as part of the guide to inform you why the method to this madness is so... Well, methodical. Why are you going through all this trouble to make a rip? Why are you getting disowned for not following these rules? Well, two issues come into play, here. One of them is losslessness; you want to give the user everything he or she needs to burn a 1:1 copy of a CD, or as close to that as practically possible. The second reason is verification of losslessness; sure you say you did it right, but how can anyone confirm this? How can anyone they share your stuff with confirm this? Why append gaps to the previous track? Because it's the most failsafe, in a nutshell. A gap is (usually) a certain amount of digital silence. Digital silence meaning that there's nothing there for your audio player to "interpret" but the concept of "don't play anything here." A gap doesn't "belong" to any track; it exists in a realm between tracks. Of course when we are ripping, we don't want to lose any audio during the process or the concept of losslessness is a fail. So when ripping in EAC, we append the digital silence of gaps to the track before it. If we don't care about losslessness, we don't need gaps at all. Technically, we could append the digital silence to the beginning of the track after the gap. However, let's say the gap is 10 seconds long. Imagine trying to play a a single song on your PC and you have to wait for 10 seconds to pass before you start hearing music. It's far more annoying than waiting for ten seconds to pass after the song has audibly ended anyway. Why fill missing offset samples with silence? There is a feature that is very rare in optical drives that is the ability to "Overread." Basically, unless you drive has this feature, you are losing the last few "frames" of audio at the end of any CD you rip! Now, you'd think this would be bad for losslessness. Thankfully, what you're missing is silent 95% of the time anyway. So you're filling the silence you didn't actually capture with silence anyway. Why not normalize? Some CDs are quieter than others. We've all seen this. Some CDs are louder than others. Normalization makes up for this during the ripping process. However, if you modify the actual audio of a file, then it is no longer lossless. That's why we can use ReplayGain to make up for this after we've ripped. Read sample offset correction? Huh? Yep. Your drive is going to either start reading a CD a few samples too late or a few samples too early. To account for this we use read sample offset correction; to force your drive to start reading earlier/later than it normally does. If we don't, we'll either end up with duplicate samples or lose some samples. Although to be honest, a sample is very small! A sample is 1/44100 of a second; you're not really losing anything audible. If this doesn't bother you, don't be upset when you an encounter a rip with no offset correction or incorrect offset correction. However, for the sake of losslessness, it makes sense to use offset correction when ripping your own stuff. That way, people who do and don't care will be happy with your rips. Why should I check for gaps? If you do not check for gaps, the worst that will happen is that it not show up in your logs. Honestly, I'm not sure why the "lossless community" insists on checking for gaps. For one, before you create a CUEsheet, the gaps will be checked (although the logs won't reflect this). Secondly, the audio you rip with gaps checked will be identical if you do not check gaps. Like I said, the worst that will happen is that the gaps will not show up in the logs. For now, there's no reason not to check gaps. It takes only a few seconds and can be done with the press of a button. Furthermore, more people will be willing to download your rips in the future (if that matters to you). But if you want to download a rip in which logs were not checked, you can rest assured that it is still lossless (assuming everything else was done correctly.) Jam it back in, in the dark.
Last edited by Eleo; Aug 11, 2006 at 12:32 PM.
|
I personally prefer to rip the CD as single tracks, if you have a perfect quality rip, I find no need to make a CUE image (it only adds in the gaps and other random pieces of data you won't even hear when you playback the CD, plus with an APE/CUE it dramatically increases seek times).
There's nowhere I can't reach. |
Is there any way to use the CUE file to indicate gaps of silence without the silence actually being appended to the end of each track?
sup eleo This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.
KALEB GRACE : Artist/Composer/Designer/Engineer/...Creator
also, I like turtles
Last edited by Kaleb.G; Mar 4, 2006 at 08:28 PM.
Reason: just "CUE"
|
EDIT: Oh, here it is:
1. Action -> [check] Leave Out Gaps 2. Action -> Create CUE Sheet -> Multiple WAV Files With Left Out Gaps This CUESheet will insert digital silence where it belongs. Gaps are appended for losslessness sake; when the burning takes place, they don't actually stay attached to any one track, they exist in a limbo between tracks. A noncompliant CUESheet generally deals with this. The reason people don't just rip this way anyway is because some people want to playback the audio - as it should sound on a CD - on their computer. I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?
Last edited by Eleo; Mar 3, 2006 at 04:13 AM.
|
Why leave out the gaps ? The whole point of ripping 'lossless' is to be as accurate as possible to the original. Why screw it up by removing silence...
I was speaking idiomatically.
I'm a zombie.
|
The reason I prefer it without gaps is because after burning it to an audio CD and playing back using a Hi-Fi stereo it seems to break the music and is really annoying for tracks that are mixed with one another. The only way I think you can burn it to a CD without having gaps is by doing a .cue file and burning it with nero, I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that's what people go by.
What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now? |
I like being able to keep the data of the gaps just for the sake of "completion", but I don't care to have silence at the end of the actual files. The gaps really don't matter to me at all in terms of listening.
So, assuming I go with this method, the "perfectionist" could still use my FLAC files and CUE files to recreate lossless files with silence appended to them as if they ripped it themselves this way, correct? FELIPE NO
KALEB GRACE : Artist/Composer/Designer/Engineer/...Creator
also, I like turtles |
What, you don't want my bikini-clad body? |
Just wondering, which detection method is recommended? I have EAC set to use Method B and Accurate, but all CDs show up with 2 seconds gaps regardless of which setting I have used, Accurate or Inaccurate, Method A, B or C. I guess there's always secure detection...
Jam it back in, in the dark. |
I'm actually not sure. I personally use Accurate, Method A, but since I've never seen gaps get incorrectly detected with any given method, I'm unsure.
There's nowhere I can't reach. |
Accurate does the trick, apparently as per the Pedro Guide... I know some detection methods are simply slower on my drives...
This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.
I'm a zombie.
|
IIRC, I had read somewhere that A works best for the newer drives, and C is better for the older ones. With B in the middle...
Guess I'll try Method A next time around. EDIT: Yeah, it works the best on my PC... How ya doing, buddy? |
I'm sort of curious, is there any way to use EAC to extract the audio tracks, while letting Alcohol 120% extract the data in a Game CD? More important, whould this still guarentee a perfect rip on both sides?
Most amazing jew boots |
I can't say for sure. I know how to deal with ripping audio and data separately, but putting them together for a 1:1 copy? I wouldn't even know how to verify the overall losslessness.
You can try ripping the audio from EAC and just copying the data files manually. What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now? |
FELIPE NO |
I'm not sure what you mean; but I believe this is normal. There is a 2-second pregap before the first track of any audio CD (sometimes longer).
Are you playing this CD on a standalone CD player or on your PC? What, you don't want my bikini-clad body? |
Jam it back in, in the dark. |
BTW, was wondering if you guys have a recommended program for burning the FLAC+CUEs? Using Nero currently, but hear it's not the best...
There's nowhere I can't reach. |
This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it. |
I own the full version of Nero, just wondering if there's a better program...
I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body? |
Exact Audio Copy is ideal since only it and another program, Burrrn, can read noncompliant cuesheets.
Exact Audio Copy also allows the use of a write offset correction. (Just like your drive reads too early or too late, it writes too early or too late also.) Burrrn does not. Basically, if you want 1:1 copies, you have to use EAC. I was speaking idiomatically.
Last edited by Eleo; Mar 31, 2006 at 12:12 AM.
|
EDIT: Damn! Caught me to the chase! But if EAC can't read the flac file, convert the FLAC to wav, then change all references to ".flac" in the CUE file to ".wav". Of course do this with a copy of the CUE sheet, in case you screw things up and make sure the wav file had the same filename as the flac file did. What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now? |
Thanks guys, though the CUE was originally made using the WAVs to begin with. So, that's not an issue...
Anyway, what's up with EAC's noncompliant cuesheets? Also, is there a reason we use them in following the above guide? What, are they better than standard CUEs? Anyway, I am assuming it's in regard to ripping the tracks separately! Additional Post:
FELIPE NO |
If they fail to match up, it will say copy finished or something similar, but it will not say OK
What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?
I'm a zombie.
|
Good to know! It takes me on average about 5-30 minutes going through each of the logs, depending on the amout of tracks and the amount of discs for each rip...
Jam it back in, in the dark. |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ripping music from GB/SPC/NSF formats with proper tagging | trackjacket | Behind the Music | 0 | Jul 20, 2007 01:47 PM |
The Difference Between Proper and Non-Proper Rips | w4ph3r | Behind the Music | 7 | Jun 15, 2007 04:21 AM |