dbPoweramp or EAC?

[dped90]

I haven't ripped CDs in years but when I did it was only select tracks on CDs. Now I need to do so again, with ripping select tracks from ~ 2 dozen CDs. Last year I had Steiger Dynamics custom build my quiet HTPC: Intel Xeon 1390, Gigabyte W480 board, 32GB ECC memory, LGWH16NS60 BD drive.

I've only ever used EAC for CD ripping,; that was > 12 years ago; Dell Dimension 8300; Pentium 4 CPU 1GB RAM. I can't recall ever having a audible errors. But sometimes yes, transient clicks. Errors? But what's the most likely cause, as I can't recall a single CD in my large collection having any scratches? I always ripped in Secure mode and only saved to uncompressed WAV files.

The only other problem I had about 13 years ago was that sometimes EAC would crash. What was the most likely cause of that problem?

Now that I need to install a ripper in my new pc, EAC or dbpoweramp? I heard that the latter is much more advantageous but only if you're willing to rip the entire CD-in which case you can exploit the worldwide database (and not just the AccurateRip database) to verify bit accuracy. But I only want to rip select tracks.

So stick with EAC or switch to dbpoweramp for other reasons?? Please share facts, opinions, experiences.

 

[Enstip]

I shifted from freeware rippers to dbPoweramp some time ago and never regretted it. I can’t remember whether you can do individual tracks but my vague recollection is that you put the cd in, it recognises/matches it in the library, and then you can select the tracks to rip. The tag editor is also very good, as is the batch converter for converting to different formats.

 

[CapMan]

dBPoweramp

 

[dped90]

dBPoweramp

But what I wish was true with dbpoweramp is that you could rip only the tracks you want for a CD, save each to an uncompressed FLAC file-which I think (unlike WAV files) automatically generates a code-which could then be compared to codes of all such independently ripped tracks from that CD title in a worldwide database like AccurateRip and/or other databases to thereby check for errors. But this is only possible if the whole CD is ripped.

 

[Enstip]

I guess it just doesn’t work like that. I believe accurate rip keeps a ‘fingerprint’ of the whole disc, not just part of it, so that’s all there is to compare against.

My view is that, in reality, if the disc read is so error prone that bit correction and re-read etc are defeated, then the poor result would be obvious and flagged. If that hasn’t occurred then chances are it’s an accurate rip, so so close to being accurate you would never detect a fault.

As an aside, 3 years ago I spent weeks ripping all my CDs but now I just stream anyway, partly because it’s easier and mainly because my hallowed CD collection didn’t come close to the diversity of music I can access through a streaming service.

 

[stoo23]

I recently 'Ripped' All my CD's onto my PC after finally getting my Desktop system together and used EAC (with AccurateRip) and was very happy with the results.
Occasionally had Some 'Read' errors on some tracks, (when ripping the whole CD) but could then simply Re-Rip the individual track successfully.

I was even able to Rip all the tracks from an unplayable copy of Steely Dan's "Everything Must Go" CD, which is great, so can only suggest EAC seems to work Very well !!

 

[dped90]

Yes, I just installed version 1.6. It approved of my LGWH16NS40 drive and I set it to rip in Secure mode, High error recovery (though I think that all disc surfaces in my collection are pristine) and Waveform> Microsoft PCM converter> 16 bit 44kHz. And when I rip a track I then click Test and Copy track > Uncompressed. Ready to roll....

 

[boyboyboy]

What about fre:ac ?

CD Rippers basically must be granted network access for certain features deemed essential.

Regular Windows apps have almost unfettered access to the (file) system, so a developer may be tempted to make an extra buck or two not in the most above-water fashion.

Bundling unwanted software has long been a problem.

There have been cases of closed-source programs that were reputable and were caught doing iffy stuff, the first to come to mind is the once-popular uTorrent.

That's not to diss either dBPowerAmp or EAC, mind?, I used the latter for a long time.

https://www.freac.org/

 

[dped90]

What about fre:ac ?

CD Rippers basically must be granted network access for certain features deemed essential.

Regular Windows apps have almost unfettered access to the (file) system, so a developer may be tempted to make an extra buck or two not in the most above-water fashion.

Bundling unwanted software has long been a problem.

There have been cases of closed-source programs that were reputable and were caught doing iffy stuff, the first to come to mind is the once-popular uTorrent.

That's not to diss either dBPowerAmp or EAC, mind?, I used the latter for a long time.

https://www.freac.org/

Because EAC has been around since the 90s I feel that it's still a trusted tool, so I installed it on my new system today, even though it's been a few years since the last version. Perhaps https://www.freac.org/ could be more reliable? Otherwise, I don't quite understand what your concerns are here.

 

[thexfile]

I would recommend EZ CD Audio Converter.

 

[boyboyboy]

Because EAC has been around since the 90s I feel that it's still a trusted tool, so I installed it on my new system today, even though it's been a few years since the last version. Perhaps https://www.freac.org/ could be more reliable? Otherwise, I don't quite understand what your concerns are here.

It's potentially dangerous to assume something is safe just because it's been around a long time. uTorrent was one of most popular torrent clients and was trusted by many who installed on many machines, recommended it to others, what could possibly go wrong?

Users were taken by surprise because they though uTorrent was safe and trusted its devs. You can read about various mishaps on Wikipedia, among which installing unwanted apps (PUA) without the user's consent, e.g a *coin miner.

Additionally, unlike on your phone where apps are sandboxed, and e.g. your music player cannot access your bank app's files, the latter isn't really true on Windows. Epic Games infamously mined Steam account data behind the user's back, and that was a major industry player, not some small dev who was dissatisfied with their monetization options (lack thereof).

If the machine you're using for ripping CDs contains sensitive data, that can potentially be collected, analyzed, mined, exfiltrated, and so on without you even realizing what's happening.

EAC being old and basically unmaintained is also a point in favor of fre:ac: potentially better security and new features. Who knows what horrible bugs could EAC have?

 

[dped90]

It's potentially dangerous to assume something is safe just because it's been around a long time. uTorrent was one of most popular torrent clients and was trusted by many who installed on many machines, recommended it to others, what could possibly go wrong?.............


If the machine you're using for ripping CDs contains sensitive data, that can potentially be collected, analyzed, mined, exfiltrated, and so on without you even realizing what's happening.

EAC being old and basically unmaintained is also a point in favor of fre:ac: potentially better security and new features. Who knows what horrible bugs could EAC have?

You make several valid points, at least regarding how long extant and/or otherwise innocuous apps can be retooled as spyware to steal your personal and financial data and commit other serious offenses. But such data I store on a NAS accessible by a pc other than my htpc, and which I rarely use online, except when it's time to backup the NAS to a cloud.

But regarding EAC's capability to assure accurate CD track rips, the developer certainly understood all there was to know about CD technology. https://6moons.com/industryfeatures/eac/eac.html And as very little if anything about that technology has changed, I tend to share Enstip's view where if the disc hasn't caused EAC to do any re-reads then the likelihood of extant or at least audible errors is too low to care about. Nine error free CD track rips reported so far; ~ 25 more to go. They should suffice as a cross section of the sound quality of my CD collection for judging how they will sound on a friend's DIY speakers that I may wish to clone.