Db Poweramp & APE

[Fulio]

What do you guys think about using Db Poweramp for ripping?

Its a smooth program, supports tons of codecs, works brilliantly...

I know most of you are EAC guys who swear by SHN and FLAC, but just to be open minded APE (monkey's audio) makes smaller lossless files, supports checksums, and has decent full fledged tags! I know FLAC has tags as well, but SHN doesn't, and APE files are noticeably smaller than either.

For that matter, the WMA lossless format is superior to SHN or FLAC (IMHO). The codec is better in that it rips faster by almost 2x!!

I mean, in the end, lossless is lossless... am I right?

Fulio Disgracias

[AAR.oner]

can't say anything re: dbpoweramp for ripping [never used it], other than the fact that every PC audiophile i know uses EAC exclusively...hopefully someone else can explain the reasons why

re: lossless compression, flac wins hands down...for one, .ape has virtually no hardware support...as for compresion ratios--when encoding a 20.6MB wav to both .flac and .ape [smallest file options], the .flac file is 10.6MB and the ape file 9.7MB -- not much difference imo, especially considering the .ape file took about 3x as long to encode...not to mention, flac is simply a far more universal codec

here's some interesting reading:
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index....ess_comparison
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=33226

and don't get me started on WMAL...yer a PC user, aren't ya?

[Fulio]

I do have a PC...

But still, as far as this issue goes it doesn't matter. As you have said, the APE files are the smallest... and that little bit adds up when you have hundreds or thousands of shows. I'm always running out of HD space.

People seem to neg on WMAL, but it sounds as good as anything else... it really does encode the fastest, and it makes smaller files than FLAC. (nearly as small as APE, and in rare instances smaller) Also, it has more hardware support than FLAC by far. (My cd walkman, mp3 player, and minidisc all support it.)

Just because a lot of people do something doesn't make it the best. SHN was the standard (still is for many), but it is obviously inferior. (Large files, No Tags, Slow Ripping, No Hardware Support) I used EAC, but switched back to DB because DB is better integrated into the Windows Shell. You just right click a file and bang you're converting. Hover your tooltip over a file, and you get the entire tag instantly... all without opening the program. And it has a great player as well.

I'm not a shill for DB. Really. Spoon is a great guy, open to suggestions for the program etc. But I have no interest in promoting the software.

I find that the files that are traded tend to have ridiculous filenames, no tags, and require seperate txt files for info. TAGS people! The entire info for the show can fit in the comments section of the tags. It winds up taking me 15 minutes to format a new show into my collection. I may be anal, but I like my collection sortable, tagged, and with thumbnail pictures on every folder.

[Fulio]

BTW

Interesting links. The second one is a bit out of date (2004), and some of the info on the first was speculative... but cool nonetheless. They rated WMAL as having no hardware support, despite the fact that it is nearly as well supported as Mp3. But the guys on the Hydrogen forum seemed to like Monkeys and WMA, both of which have improved substantially since then.



I have a feeling that WMA works better under Windows than it does on a Mac or Linux machine...

[diggrd]

Originally Posted by Fulio

...

I find that the files that are traded tend to have ridiculous filenames, no tags, and require seperate txt files for info. TAGS people! The entire info for the show can fit in the comments section of the tags. It winds up taking me 15 minutes to format a new show into my collection. I may be anal, but I like my collection sortable, tagged, and with thumbnail pictures on every folder.

My tags make sense to me as your tags make sense to you. I think people who use them have preferences that may not be universal.

Originally Posted by Fulio

...
I have a feeling that WMA works better under Windows than it does on a Mac or Linux machine...

I have a feeling that this is the reason there is less support for it and ape. dBpowerAMP does have nice integration for windows but the speed of ripping leaves me a little leery of it's thoroughness. I don't really need to rip much so speed is really not an issue. What exactly do you rip? For me it's only an occasional commercial CD or a bootleg that I could get from other sources if I took the time to track them down.

[Fulio]

I use Db for ripping, transcoding (lossless to lossless, making lossy versions for friend's ipods), Deflating to WAV before editing or remastering with Wavelab, Cubase, or Nuendo... everything really. I also use the player to listen to my collection because it supports nearly every codec, has an intuitive interface, allows sorting by every tag item, and uses less system resources than say WinAmp or whatever. It is only missing some good visualizations to be damn near perfect. I don't use the cd burner, though. Since the program is modular, you don't have to use all the pieces. Sometimes I use the SVETA program to load an ipod or mp3 player as well... (it does all the conversions automatically)

Anyway, I don't wanna sound like a commercial for Db. I got into Spoon's Illustrate stuff early on and have found him and his crew to be thoughtful, responsive, and efficient. I have never had any problem with any of my rips. And you can adjust the settings to slow it down and ensure accuracy if your disc is questionable. Though, it is the drive that determines whether a certain scratched disc can be ripped well. Just use the checksums if you're worried.

Most of my ripping comes from traded shows I want in my computer or shows that I have burnt to get off my computer that I need to send to a friend or fellow taper online. Of course filling the portable hard drive player or my old minidisc usually involves some ripping as well...

Originally Posted by diggrd

My tags make sense to me as your tags make sense to you. I think people who use them have preferences that may not be universal.

I wasn't talking about tags being ridiculous, but filenames. (tags are tags - either they are filled out or not) this format of for example bhic20060726d1t12.shn is painfully weak. What is wrong with {artist} - {album} - {track #} - {title}.shn or whatever? I mean ISO and UDP both support fairly long filenames...

[Five]

dbpoweramp is not suitable for ripping because it doesn't provide error reports or support offset correction

so you can never make an exact audio copy using dbpoweramp, and if there's errors while ripping... you might catch them by ear, because there's no other way with dbpoweramp!

as for ape, I agree. I believe it is like what rar is to zip. only prob with ape is some strangeness with the new version communicating with shntool/tlh.

[Fulio]

Originally Posted by Five

dbpoweramp is not suitable for ripping because it doesn't provide error reports or support offset correction.

Actually Db does have offset correction. It is mysteriously under the
CD Player Emulation > Audio CD Parameters heading... but it works.

Db uses this thing called Accurate Rip which I don't use. It's okay if you're ripping a commercial disc, but not much use for bootlegs and rare stuff. Still, you can use MD5's. I've been told that even the best checksums are not 100% infallible, but if the wave is unaltered that is what matters. I spend a lot of time looking at waves (mastering recordings etc.), and I think some audiophiles get overly caught up in the wrong things. In the end, you want the best sounding recording possible not necessarily the most pristine in some abstract sense. (IMHO)

[RetroDude83]

I would never use dB for ripping cds. I tested it out in comparison to EAC with scratched cds/or not burnt correctly discs and stuff, result; while EAC telles me about errors or even performes error correction on minor flaws, dB does not tell me shit about anything and sometimes even stops just somewhere while ripping a file, so the file will be incomplete as dB couldn't cope with the error and stoped. therefore you would have to listen to what you've ripped to make sure its complete... it happend to me and EAC did quiet well while dB

I wouldn't mind using dB for converting files already on my harddrive, but for ripping cds it's just useless imo.

as for FLAC, you just have to find a good player, not too hard as it's pretty common nowadays. of course no portable player will play this(or maybe some do I don't know about anyone though), but if you're going to put music on it you can put them files in lossy formats, that's what they acctually made for I think.

APE is just not convenient imo, and ripping takes too much time while I save like 15MB, so I couldn't care less about APE. and WMAL, sounds very microsoft to me no good...

[Fulio]

It has come to my attention that Db has a new beta of their converter program (DMC) which is utilizing a kick-ass new error reporting and correction function. It has been testing superior to EAC and way better than Plextools. When it is finished, it could be the new state of the art!

Here is some info:
http://www.dbpoweramp.com/secure-ripper.htm

[justincan]

i use db for converting and i think it's fantastic. never tried ripping with it, except for mp3s for my ipod