What software are you guys using to rip MP3?

What Im looking for is something to help me clean up my MP3 library, wich right now is over 150GB! I know there are a lot of duplicates on there, so I want something that can automatically find dupes for me, normalize the sound levels (some play louder than others), update metedata (a lot is incomplete), and covert from WMA to MP3 (should help the HU scan the disk faster with only one format), rip audio CD's into MP3, as well as download and catalogue new stuff.
So what are you guys using that has the features. I was looking at MP3 Maker 12 Del. Seems to have everything I want, anyone use it? Thanks

Oh yeah, I DO NOT use Ipod, or zune or anything like that. Main use si to put MP3 on my small portable player to run with and a portable HD to play in the car (USB on HU)

 

Normalizing will make many tracks sound bad, and really damage tracks that have a good amount of dynamic range. If you don't care about sq, then Mp3Gain is free software which will do a bitchin job of normalizing.

I use CDEX to rip and encode, using Lame / 320kbps. This is acceptable in a car, no problem.

 

I havnt heard of that issue with the normalizing before. Do you think that is a problem with certain software or is it a general out come of the process. In other words, can some programs do it better than others? As long as it doesnt sound like totoal crap I guess it would be better than cranking away to one song, then it switches and you get your speakers blown out by the next song!

 

Normalizing is a very bad thing. If you use a good encoder with scripting, you can add automatic tags that tell the playback medium to boost or cut by x dB which don't actually normalize the file itself. Album Gain, Replay Gain, and several other things can be embedded.

Lame -V0 VBR is virtually the same sound quality as 320 CBR with significant reduction in filesize.

See this for further info and the bottom-line best archival conversion method available: REACT2

 

Audiograbber

 

iTunes will do everything you ask of Mp3 software, with or without an iPod.

 

I can't think of any reasons why anyone would NOT use iTunes. It's the number one software for a reason. The only issue might be converting those wmv's. I've never tried that.

 

iTunes is number one ONLY because that's what ships with every iPod, it's relatively easy to use and the masses follow suite like mindless cattle. It's the same reason Internet Explorer is used more than Firefox.

Compressed audio files are not all created equal, and there's much more to it than simple bitrate. REACT2/Exact Audio Copy does a number of things no other ripper/encoder does... namely, very precise error correction and logging of suspicious sectors. Programs like iTunes, Nero, etc. all skip difficult-to-read data without corrections. None use jitter correction. Skips and clicks can appear in the ripped file without you ever knowing until you listen to the track later. REACT scripting allows you to rip to multiple formats at once (CD image, wav, flac, mp3, wavpack, NeroAAC, iTunesAAC, and Ogg). It also allows almost complete customization of tagging methods. Short of listening to the original CD, this is as good as it gets.

From the EAC site: * It works with a technology, which reads audio CDs almost perfectly. If there are any errors that can’t be corrected, it will tell you on which time position the (possible) distortion occurred, so you could easily control it with e.g. the media player.

With other audio grabbers you usually need to listen to every grabbed wave because they only do jitter correction. Scratched CDs read on CD-ROM drives often produce distortions. But listening to every extracted audio track is a waste of time. Exact Audio Copy conquers these problems by making use of several technologies like multi-reading with verify and AccurateRip.

 

iTunes was number one before the iPod. It's the main reason the iPod is superior to all the other units available. It makes the iPod easy to use. Error correction can be turned on or off. I've been getting excellent results for years and never experienced an audible error or dropout. I never heard of Jitter correction. You either have a low jitter clock or you don't. That's hardware. You know I respect your opinions but please clue me in on how that's possible.

 

It's easiest to past others' explanations... and in looking for good information, I've found that most rippers actually implement some form of jitter correction. So others reading understand what jitter is:

"There are two kinds of jitter that relate to audio CDs. The usual meaning of "jitter" refers to a time-base error when digital samples are converted back to an analog signal. The other form of "jitter" is used in the context of digital audio extraction from CDs. This kind of "jitter" causes extracted audio samples to be doubled-up or skipped entirely.The problem occurs because the Philips CD specification does not require block-accurate addressing. While the audio data is being fed into a buffer (a FIFO whose high- and low-water marks control the spindle speed), the address information for audio blocks is pulled out of the subcode channel and fed into a different part of the controller. Because the data and address information are disconnected, the CD player is unable to identify the exact start of each block. The inaccuracy is small, but if the system doing the extraction has to stop, write data to disk, and then go back to where it left off. The CD player will not be able to seek to the exact same position. As a result, the extraction process will restart a few samples early or late, resulting in doubled or omitted samples. These glitches often sound like tiny repeating clicks during playback.With most CD-ROM drives that support digital audio extraction, you can get jitter-free audio by using a program that extracts the entire track all at once."


What I should have mentioned as an advantage of EAC was secure-mode reading:

In secure mode this program either reads every audio sector at least twice or rely on extended error information that some drives are able to return with the audio data. That is one reason why the program is slower than other rippers. But by using this technique non-identical sectors are detected. If an error occurs (read or sync error), the program keeps on reading this sector, until eight of 16 retries are identical, but at maximum one, three or five times (according to the selected error recovery quality) these 16 retries are read. So, in the worst case, bad sectors are read up to 82 times! But this effort will help the program to obtain the best result by comparing all of the retries.

If it is not sure that the audio stream is correct (at least that it can not be said at approx. 99.5%) the program will tell the user where the (possible) read error occurred. The program also tries to correct the jitter artifacts that occur on the first block of a track, so that each extraction should be exactly the same. On drives which have the “accurate stream” feature, this is guaranteed. Of course, this technology is a little bit more complex, especially with some CD drives which implements caching. When drives cache audio data, every sector read will be read from the drives cache and is that way always identical. Basically there are several ways to clear the cache. In newer versions it will over-read sectors, so that the cache contains sectors from a position elsewhere on the CD.

CDex appears to be an excellent choice. CDex and EAC are often referred to as "boutique rippers." Control freaks only.

 

I didn't realize that sector block jitter was significant enough to be an issue, but I suppose it's possible on slower drives that have poor format "housekeeping". I'm sure that most "ripping" software will have some sort of technique to address these possible issues. Thanks.

 

NP ...The real problem is seen with damaged (scratched) discs. EAC handles bad discs differently than other rippers. iTunes, Nero, Audiograbber, etc. all buzz right through bad sectors without verifying the data. EAC keeps hammering away at the disc until either the bad sector is read statistically correctly or it conforms to an "Accurte-Rip" spec referenced from on-line databases. The really nice part is the log file EAC creates that allow you to go right to a time slot in a track to hear for yourself if the error was corrected properly. It sounds like a lot of overkill, and most times it is, but for those occasional bad burns, shoddy "pressings" or simply short-time access to a disc that might be hard to find, it's worth the piece of mind.

I have to revise my assessment of CDex after reading this: http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index....Dex_SecureMode

 

How is it that all of my threads end in this deep technological discussions

Seriously, You guys simply amaze me with the amount of knowledge! Great info!

Sounds like EAC is the way to go for ripping to a CD, to ensure the highest quality. If I am more concerned with a way to file, eliminate dupes, and fix metedata then most of these programs seem to be pretty identical with the main difference being the UI.

With REACT2 or EAC, will it allow you to simply upgrade the quality of an MP3 that is being left on the drive? It looks like all of the info you gave was related to burning on a CD or ripping from one.

 

If your discs are even remotely scratched, REACT2/EAC is the better option. The combination can also add tags that others don't. REACT2 is a scripting utility that is an add-on to EAC to automate EAC and some other smaller apps so everything is effectively accomplished in one step.

EAC is not a library. You need a separate app like iTunes for that. Actually, iTunes is what I use to control my library.

If I understand your MP3 question, you CANNOT improve an already-ripped/compressed track. It has to be re-ripped and re-compressed to "improve" it.

 

Spkrboy, Thanks that helped a lot actually. I guess the real problem is I dont have disks for the vast majority of these MP3's. I just have 150GB of MP3s on a hard disk. I definatley will want the ability to rip at high quality but mainly just want to clean up the library of files I do have.

 

As I said earlier, you will have to start from scratch to improve anything. There is no "cleaning up" once you've ripped. I guess I'm lucky that most of my music came from fairly clean CD's to good drives so iTunes has worked flawlessly for me for about 7 years now. It will do all the things you want and then some. I don't know what Apple uses in iTunes but as spkrboy noted, there is certainly jitter correction of some type and error correction is switchable to on or off. You just don't get a log file telling you where it had a problem if there was a problem.

Additionally, I prefer the AAC format instead of MP3. For any given file size, AAC is better. iTunes also offers a completely lossless format, although it's only about a 50% file size savings.

Have fun.

 

OK so I decided to give iTunes a try...since its free. After about an hour of importing my music it started going through the list and it says "converting xxxx(song title)" What is it converting to? I didnt tell it to do anything yet, I just opened it up and said find my music. Whats it doing?

 

I think it's just converting titles to a format it can read. It might also attempt to do something with wav's but it can't. If you have a lot of wav's, you will have to re-do those in a newer format. Use it for a few days and you'll soon love it.

 

So you went through all of that just to come back and say you use iTunes yourself.
Why not just agree from the beginning?
I read the OP and suggested iTunes based on the needs expressed in it. You come in and go off on a tangent.
We already know you know stuff. What else are you trying to prove to your fellow "mindless cattle".

 

Because I don't agree. iTunes is a lousy ripper compared to EAC. It's only decent function is as a library manager. It wasn't a tangent, since Vette-kid did ask about CD to mp3 in his original post. My methodology for this consists of more than one program, each proven to be among the best at what I use it for.

Your inability to follow a thread does not make my post any less-related.