Thanks Mark that answers my question. Rips are pretty quick with
dBpoweramp Reference in one pass when AccurateRip verifies the data.
The discs that I have put in which are not recognised are, as you say,
probably a different pressing. In this situation the software falls
back on the Ultra Secu
scoughlan;203061 Wrote:
> I notice that if AccurateRip verifies the rip on the first pass, the
> software forgoes the second and third pass. Am I safe to rely on this
> feature? Or, would I be better off disabling AccurateRip and forcing
> multiple passes with Secure Rip?
AccurateRip compares
I found a tool in Nero that reports there is no support for C2 error
reporting on my HP drive. Oh well, I suppose I have time, and I can
always listen to my MP3's until I get around to re-ripping everything
to FLAC.
With dBpoweramp Reference, I currently have AccurateRip and Secure Rip
on, with
willyhoops;202597 Wrote:
> well take one of the cds you got a rip on already and scratch it and try
> again! or buy one and scratch!
> it's vital you test dbpoweramp for this feature or you are waisting
> lots of time! for 200 cds it's worth it!
assuming you value your original CDs you could al
well take one of the cds you got a rip on already and scratch it and try
again! or buy one and scratch!
it's vital you test dbpoweramp for this feature or you are waisting
lots of time! for 200 cds it's worth it!
--
willyhoops
---
Mark Lanctot;202349 Wrote:
> What format have you ripped to already? If it's a lossless format, it's
> easier to transcode.
Sadly, I originally used iTunes to rip to MP3 as I didn't want to be
tied into the proprietary Apple lossless. But I hadn't heard of
Squeezebox then. I've learnt a lot f
As the thread starter, I should provide an update on what's happened
since. I went with EAC / FLAC - although daunting at first, once it's
set up, it's pretty easy to use. I am also the proud owner of a
Transporter.
Basically, I am a very happy music listener! Thanks for your help
everyone.
--
scoughlan;202326 Wrote:
> FLAC it is! Many thanks for making that clear. :)
>
> Now, I'd better get going if I'm to re-rip 200 CD's...
What format have you ripped to already? If it's a lossless format,
it's easier to transcode.
--
Mark Lanctot
'Sean Adams' Response-O-Matic checklist, pat
FLAC it is! Many thanks for making that clear. :)
Now, I'd better get going if I'm to re-rip 200 CD's...
--
scoughlan
scoughlan's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11583
View this thread: http://f
Think it's important to add that for Squeezebox users using flac instead
of apple lossless will minimize cpu usage on your server. Because the
squeezebox does not speak apple lossless the server has to decompress
on the fly before wireless transmission. The same point applies to wma
lossless. So f
Do a search for "WAV and FLAC" on the forums and you'll see the
shortcomings of wav expounded at length (biggest drawback: no tags).
--
smc2911
smc2911's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4388
View t
I'm new to these forums too, and have just purchased my first
Squeezebox. I also use iTunes, though mainly to rip and organise my
collection. I've followed this thread interestedly. My question is
this: Why not use iTunes to import with an uncompressed format which it
does support? Such as AIF
tyler_durden;201617 Wrote:
> Is there any possibility that Apple would pull a M$ and render old files
> incompatible with newer versions of the encoder/decoder? M$ does it ALL
> the time with their so-called upgrades to their OS and Office Suites.
> The only reason to do it is to force the mass
opaqueice;201616 Wrote:
> I don't understand the arguments against ALAC on the basis that it's
> closed and therefore Apple may cease to support it. Is it really
> reasonable to suppose that all of a sudden all software capable of
> playing ALAC will disappear, leaving ALAC users up a creek?
I don't understand the arguments against ALAC on the basis that it's
closed and therefore Apple may cease to support it. Is it really
reasonable to suppose that all of a sudden all software capable of
playing ALAC will disappear, leaving ALAC users up a creek?
The free open-source program foob
I agree with Heuer, except in my case I use REACT2 to rip CDs
simultaneously to FLAC and M4A (AAC) formats. After a lot of testing,
I concluded that at similar bitrates, most M4A tracks sounded slightly
better than Lame-encoded MP3 tracks (either CBR or VBR) on my iPod.
--
Balthazar_B
All my music is in FLAC format for use on the SB3 and converted to MP3
for use on the iPod. This way I can manage my MP3 music in iTunes. You
do not need to have anything to do with ALAC or AAC unless you really
want to. It does surprise me how many people think buying an iPod
limits you to Apple
davep;201554 Wrote:
> Getting really left field now one could imagine the iTunes Store
> offering downloadable flac versions of parts of their catalogue -
> albeit at some kind of a premium.
iPods would also have to be updated for this to happen.
I can't see them selling FLAC files, but i wouldn
jonheal;201549 Wrote:
>
> On a related subject, I hear tell that QuickTime on Leopard will
> support FLAC natively.
I saw that rumour also. The suggestion is that, if this were to
happen, then it would be logical that iTunes would also be upgraded to
support flac which would give a big boost t
The ONLY reson I can see to choose ALAC over FLAC is if you're going to
abandon the Squeezebox altogether and go with an Apple TV device (which
does have a very slick interface, BTW). But, you'll need a TV next to
it, and some of us still keep our Hi-Fis and home theaters in seperate
rooms.
On a
adamslim;199169 Wrote:
> Really? Even if they are, are they going to continue to support their
> products when the next big thing comes along? ...
So far they did, and you will always be able to convert from ALAC to
FLAC and other formats. Even if ALAC isn't supported by Apple, decoding
will b
I hate to spread FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) but I'll do it anyway...
ALAC is closed. That means you don't know what they put in there. Is
there a switch that allows apple to turn off files so they won't play
any more or can't be copied more than x times? Is there something that
sends a mes
The choice is simple, FLAC is simply more flexible than ALAC.
>From Flac you could go back to WAV, AIFF, and to CD
>From Flac you could go to MP3
>Flac support 24 Bits, Multichannel, etc...
>Flac is supported on Windows, Linux, MacOS...
>Flac is easy to broadcast (ex:Squeezebox)
For me Flac is s
sc53;199144 Wrote:
> Apple is very likely to be here longer than I will be.
Really? Even if they are, are they going to continue to support their
products when the next big thing comes along? Will you end up having
to buy an apple.tv, apple.house and get an apple.wife to get it all to
work?
I
Recently iTunes deleted 10% of my .m4a library without any reason to do
so.
Thumbs up for FLAC!
--
michel
michel's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4393
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.c
I have been using Apple Lossless since it came out and I find iTunes
very easy to use and manage my music. I am not worried about its being
proprietary, Apple is very likely to be here longer than I will be. I
find all the extra steps for FLAC time consuming whereas with iTunes I
just select my pr
The point of FLAC and Apple lossless is that they are LOSSLESS, so there
is no difference in the bits presented to the DAC regardless of whether
it is stored as FLAC, ALAC, or uncompressed WAV. As has been pointed
out iTunes may not be the best way to rip your CD collection. I have
been very hap
No difference in quality between ALAC and FLAC but you will find most
people favour FLAC because it is non-proprietary code unlike Apple's.
Lots of user support and development going on with FLAC as well, hence
the following. Choose carefully as once you have ripped in one format
it is a pain to
Ray70;199074 Wrote:
> Hello, first post so be gentle. I am giving serious thought to buying a
> Transporter (this will be my first Slim Devices purchase - jumping in
> at the deep end). Partnering equipment will be Jeff Rowland Concentra
> II amp, Focal Lab 1027be speakers. My (soon to be redunda
Hello, first post so be gentle. I am giving serious thought to buying a
Transporter (this will be my first Slim Devices purchase - jumping in
at the deep end). Partnering equipment will be Jeff Rowland Concentra
II amp, Focal Lab 1027be speakers. My (soon to be redundant?) CDP is a
Marantz SA11-S1
30 matches
Mail list logo
