32 replies to this topic

[Nada]

This thread is aimed to help newcomers with ripping on Windoze machines using EAC.

There is also a great guide. I found out using this guide I had set up EAC sub-optimally years ago.

I hope this post helps save others the pain of considering re ripping rare CD's that are'nt on the AccurateRip database.

EAC is still state of the art software for ripping CD's. Its able to reread damaged portions repeatedly to extract the bits where possible.


http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/

Setting it up correctly is essential:

http://blowfish.be/eac/

Edited by Nada, 04 May 2012 - 08:53 AM.

[Drizt]

Indeed, it is a good choice if looking for a free ripper.

dbpoweramp is better but costs a modest fee.

I haven't used any of the other ones.

Anyone else have any experience with alternatives?

[fordgtlover]

Indeed, it is a good choice if looking for a free ripper.

dbpoweramp is better but costs a modest fee.

I haven't used any of the other ones.

Anyone else have any experience with alternatives?

What do you mean by better?

[kunalraiker]

EAC is state of the art software for ripping CD's.

Its Windoze based and surprisingly, is freeware. Its speciality is ripping damaged or rare CD's.

Setting it up correctly is essential:

http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/

http://blowfish.be/eac/

Thanks for discovering it after......lets say over 3 years in existence

Sorry mate, no heart feelings, had to just say it.

[Drizt]

What do you mean by better?

Faster, easier to set up and use. Its just a more polished application.

Don't get me wrong, EAC does the job sound quality wise (It produces a lossless rip, confirmed by accurateRip).

[datafone]

Been around a lot longer than 3....

Several at least.

[kunalraiker]

Been around a lot longer than 3....

Several at least.

Shush I was trying to be nice!

[fordgtlover]

Faster, easier to set up and use. Its just a more polished application.

Don't get me wrong, EAC does the job sound quality wise (It produces a lossless rip, confirmed by accurateRip).

Cool

[LogicprObe]

Thanks for discovering it after......lets say over 3 years in existence

It must be longer than that.
I was using it for yonks!

[CP_]

Got to be over 10 years I'd say - used it back in the day! Now on a Mac the options are limited (no EAC or DBpoweramp).

[b4sound]

Got to be over 10 years I'd say - used it back in the day! Now on a Mac the options are limited (no EAC or DBpoweramp).

I use XLD on the mac. Works but clunky if the DB doesnt retrieve all the necessary info/artwork. What do you use on the mac?

Edited by b4sound, 04 May 2012 - 07:57 AM.

[CP_]

I use iTunes and rip AIFF files.

[Batty]

EAC for me

[Nada]

I listed this thread for new comers in response to fair questions about ripping. For new comers its clearly a complex and confusing task initially.

The important info I listed isnt the link to EAC but the link to the excellent set-up guide. Without correct set up EAC is useless. Finding a reputable guide isnt so easy.


[Edit: Inappropriate comments made towards another member. If you have a problem with someone or a post, report it to the moderators. Warning Given.]

Edited by Marc, 11 May 2012 - 10:35 PM.
Inappropriate comments removed.

[Batty]

I do not rip to FLAC any longer but to .WAV as disk space is so cheap.
EAC is very good for this and thanks for the links I shall read through them this evening and ensure I am getting the best from the software.

[CP_]

A good reminder post, if I were on PC I'd still be using EAC. I remember the good old days sitting back and letting Lame produce the ultimate MP3 for me though! Urgh!

[datafone]

I listed this thread for new comers in response to fair questions about ripping. For new comers its clearly a complex and confusing task initially.

The important info I listed isnt the link to EAC but the link to the excellent set-up guide. Without correct set up EAC is useless. Finding a reputable guide isnt so easy.

Plenty of good guides for EAC http://www.google.co...lient=firefox-a

It's easy to use without hardly any setting up, unless you are using a compressed format.

[kunalraiker]

Plenty of good guides for EAC http://www.google.co...lient=firefox-a

It's easy to use without hardly any setting up, unless you are using a compressed format.

We all know that right, and that was precisely my point.Thanks for making it more visible to the OP as he seemed to take offence.

[alistairm]

Keep it civilized please and on topic. And just because software has been around for a while doesn't mean there aren't people using it for the first time who might be interested in some guiding.

[AudioGeek]

I started off with EAC many years ago. Recently switched to DBPoweramp as I find it much simpler.
Both will do the job!

[emesbee]

I have been using EAC for quite a few years, but for a long while didn't know how to configure it properly, so all the tracks I ripped were called Track01, Track02, etc.

Then, I started playing around a bit with FLAC, and found some useful information on the flac sourceforge web site about configuring it. I don't use FLAC now, only rip to WAV, but its worth having a look. It gave me some useful pointers on how to configure EAC's file naming for ripped files. Lots of interesting stuff there too.

http://flac.sourceforge.net/

[empirical]

I started with EAC years ago, but went back and re-ripped everything when I realized how much better sound quality dbpoweramp delivers. I go the "pro" version for about $35. It may be that dbpoweramp gets the offset right. Just speculation.

Steve N.

[millsy]

Posting here to remind me to dig up a guide on EAC I have, XLD too

[emesbee]

I started with EAC years ago, but went back and re-ripped everything when I realized how much better sound quality dbpoweramp delivers. I go the "pro" version for about $35. It may be that dbpoweramp gets the offset right. Just speculation.

Steve N.

I haven't used dbpoweramp, but wouldn't you expect the same files ripped using either program to sound the same? (Assuming the rips are uncompressed, and playback is done the same way.) Have you done a bit comparison between files ripped by the two programs to see if there is any difference?

[Drizt]

I haven't used dbpoweramp, but wouldn't you expect the same files ripped using either program to sound the same? (Assuming the rips are uncompressed, and playback is done the same way.) Have you done a bit comparison between files ripped by the two programs to see if there is any difference?

That is correct. If you use AccurateRip you can confirm that they are bit perfect.

[datafone]

I use EAC, if wavelab is not installed, nice and small, and quick to setup.

That's how I find it anyhow, but setup is easy if just ripping to wave,

never tried dbpoweramp before.

[colby1970]

i used EAC for about 8 years and changed to dbpoweramp late last year, much faster and easier. Cant hear anything different sound quality wise (they both report the same number of samples offset with my drive)

[warrengday]

I also started with EAC and then moved to dBpoweramp (when I got a RipNAS). Several times faster (!) to get also guaranteed accurate rips. Plus images are automatically downloaded from the net (amazon), which are useful as these images used by the current UI that I'm using.

[emesbee]

I started with EAC, and have stayed with it. It does what I want it do quite well, so I haven't felt the need to try alternatives. It is very good at error correction (which I believe is what it was originally written for).

[Marc]

I listed this thread for new comers in response to fair questions about ripping. For new comers its clearly a complex and confusing task initially.

The important info I listed isnt the link to EAC but the link to the excellent set-up guide. Without correct set up EAC is useless. Finding a reputable guide isnt so easy.

Best bet would be to delete the inappropriate comments from your post - and in future please use the Report button to report users or posts you feel require input from Moderators.

EDIT: Seeing as you don't want to remove the inappropriate comments as per my request, I will do it for you.

[cz2000]

I have used both quite a bit over the years. I started with CDex before switching to EAC, then dbPowerAmp and finally back to EAC. Here are my brief observations.


- dbpoweramp is faster. This was the biggest difference between the two apps. EAC first rips each wave, then encodes. DB can be ripping while also encoding the previous track at the same time (use of multiple cores I believe)
- they both use the same databases for tagging, and both use the accurate rip database. So equal in anything regarding sound quality or tagging.
- dbpoweramp is more easy for beginners /faster to set up. EAC seemed more powerful, in that it had even more settings.

But with all that said I went back to EAC once my DB trial ended. Once it's all set up, EAC is great and in my opinion still the most professional ripping software.

One other thing I noticed was that the guide in the first post is for the old version of EAC. It's 98% still compatible, but the command line has changed. For flac with EAC 1.0 betas use something like
-T "artist=%artist%" -T "title=%title%" -T "album=%albumtitle%" -T "date=%year%" -T "tracknumber=%tracknr%" -T "genre=%genre%" -8 %source%

Edited by cz2000, 05 May 2012 - 02:31 AM.

[bruce108]

Must admit I use Foobar2000 to rip. It invokes AccurateRip as well. Does that mean it's as good as EAC or just that the report on the rip conveys the same information?

[haraldo]

For you "non-windows" guys out there, EAC also runs well under wine, I used it successfully with SUSE Linux, Enterprise Desktop, should probably work well with any Linux distro

Right now I run EAC with Windows though