>since I've gone down the EAC/FLAC route, I've been too impressed with the increase in sound quality to want to go back to WMP/WMA
You shouldn't get a sound difference between lossless WMA and flac. Are you sure you were using lossless WMA? I did an A/B comparison, comparing the result of doing: WM10->lossless WMA -> exported WAV file, and EAC->FLAC ->exported WAV file. Apart from some header differences, the waveform data was bit for bit the same. I've since done A/B listening tests with a squeezebox playing the lossless WMA versus the original CD, and the sound is the same, allowing for the different DACs in the CD player and squeezebox. (Basically, I couldn't tell which was which). I'm just writing this because when I started looking into ripping, I got the impression that WM10/lossless WMA was simply no good. That might have been true at one point, but 500+ CDs in, I can say that it's not a problem. I've only had 2 discs I couldn't read, and I got around it by just using the other cd drive in my machine, and it ripped fine (albeit very very slowly!) The sound quality is identical to the original source. (I do have error correction turned on though - if it wasn't, then scratched discs might break up in places) -- andy b _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping
