od_m
@pacbell.n | reply to cdigioia
...
Gogo + Audiograbber is the fastest solution, bar none. Not bad quality, either.
Anyway, I use EAC + LAME v3.97a11--unsurpassed from a quality standpoint. |
|
el scorcho
Cupid Stunt
join:2000-12-01
Elmhurst, NY
clubs: | reply to cdigioia
Re: Fastest MP3 Ripping Program?
gogo? yuck. the latest alpha builds of LAME are almost as fast with the --vbr-new switch and offer much better sound quality in comparison |
|
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs:
| Be careful using LAME alphas.. they usually aren't tested for quality thoroughly. I think 3.96.1 also supports --vbr-new, you should use that version instead of an alpha.
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. |
|
cdigioia
Premium
join:2005-06-08
korea, repub | reply to cdigioia
Great, thanks again everyone for all your help.
I think I have more than enough suggestions to play at this point, thanks again! |
|
cdigioia
Premium
join:2005-06-08
korea, repub
1 edit | reply to AMDUSER
Thanks. Is the Lame Mp3 encoder much better (faster, higher quality, etc.) than the one built-in to WMP? |
|
AMDUSER
Premium
join:2003-05-28
Earth
clubs:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| said by cdigioia  :Thanks. Is the Lame Mp3 encoder much better (faster, higher quality, etc.) than the one built-in to WMP? Better... it depends on your preference really. As far as being faster, depends on your computer hardware and how fast cd-rom can rip digital audio as howie mentioned.
Quality though will vary with the bit rate settings, the higher it is, the longer it will take. |
|
thender2
Glamour Profession
Premium
join:2004-05-16
Staten Island, NY
| reply to cdigioia
said by cdigioia :Thanks. Is the Lame Mp3 encoder much better (faster, higher quality, etc.) than the one built-in to WMP? By far, LAME with the --alt-presets is the best. Don't bother with CBR, either. It's pretty obselete in comparison to the --alt presets for any given filesize.
--
The Problem With Music.
Our Rationale
Time to rewrite the DMCA. |
|
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs:
| reply to cdigioia
said by cdigioia :Thanks. Is the Lame Mp3 encoder much better (faster, higher quality, etc.) than the one built-in to WMP? Windows Media Player doesn't have an MP3 encoder built into it. It encodes WMA files. MP3 may be better than WMA at a given bitrate, but many people can't tell the difference.
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. |
|
sechs
Premium
join:2001-07-19
Left Coast | Isn't it the other way around?
I avoid the issue by using vorbis....
--
It's not what you know but who you know... |
|
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs:
| said by sechs :Isn't it the other way around? I avoid the issue by using vorbis.... No, listening tests have not backed up MS's claims that WMA sounds better than MP3 at the same bitrate.
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. |
|
sechs
Premium
join:2001-07-19
Left Coast
 ·AT&T Yahoo
·Astound Broadband
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| Errr.... that's what I said.
said by Rhobite :MP3 may be better than WMA at a given bitrate
--
It's not what you know but who you know... |
|
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs: | I'm thoroughly confused, but it's good that you use Vorbis (wish my iPod could play Vorbis files).
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. |
|
PliotronX
My Katamari's Bigger Than Your Katamari
join:2000-05-13
Sunland, CA
| reply to cdigioia
Without even ABXing, it is easy as pie to debunk MS' claim that WMA @ 64Kbps = MP3 @ 128Kbps. At the same bitrate it's a little more difficult with a lot of samples, but some samples may reveal weaknesses in one format that the other may not exhibit. I have not tested WMA a lot, because I am leary of MS' claims altogether because they harbor a goal of market domination, and also Lame has never let me down. It's up to you to find what works best for yourself, don't believe everything you read on the intarweb 
That said, I hadn't kept up to date on the development of Lame, but a little bit of reading I've found quite a few folks are saying the latest alphas with --vbr-new are equal to or better in quality and with equivalent bitrate to --preset but the kicker is that it encodes at around 1/4 of the time. According to Gabriel, -V2 --vbr-new is equivalent to --preset standard and -V0 is extreme and -V4 is medium. I'll have to check this out, but I'm not going to recode my collection which is mostly in MusePack -insane though  |
|
gephc
Premium
join:2003-05-31
Minooka, IL
| reply to Rhobite
said by Rhobite :Windows Media Player doesn't have an MP3 encoder built into it. It encodes WMA files. The latest Windows Media Player 10 for XP does have an mp3 encoder in addition to wma. You can make the change in Tools > Options > Rip Music. |
|
JE
Can I Taste It? Mmmm
Premium
join:2000-12-15
Brooklyn, NY | reply to cdigioia
WinAMP |
|
Dread
Macs suck
Premium
join:2005-02-28
Bronx, NY
·Optimum Online
| reply to MikeStammer
said by MikeStammer :EAC is the best, hands down. combine that with LAME and you have a winning combination. EAC has fast mode for speed and a slower mode for quality. » www.exactaudiocopy.de/ |
|
Bryanhoop
Mangum Addict
join:2002-04-07
| reply to cdigioia
EAC and Lame is the standard.
If you want a thoroughly tested compile use 3.96.1 with your desired preset (and I would recommend adding the fast switch for your needs).
Lame 3.97 alpha 11 is also excellent and heavily tested using the -V2 --vbr-new switch. |
|
el scorcho
Cupid Stunt
join:2000-12-01
Elmhurst, NY
clubs:
| reply to cdigioia
i haven't found much to fault with the new --vbr-new switch at all, and i've been encoding most of my classical and jazz recordings from it for the last few months.
other good switches depending on your needs -
~128kbps
-V5 --vbr-new --athaa-sensitivity 1
best for voice recordings/audio books -
-V9 -m m --resample 22 --lowpass 11 --vbr-new --lowpass-width 2 -B80
--
Hardware_411: what are you talking about...i dont want deal with newegg.com no more just watch they are going to be garbage in a few months |
|
