Have your say & ask the experts!

What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio...

43 replies [Last post]
MajorFubar's picture
Online
Joined: 3 Mar 2010
Posts: 3116
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

L00k_C wrote:
Isn't WAV 100% reproduction over FLAC which is 98%

No. FLAC compression is 100% lossless. Think of it being like ZIP or RAR tailored especialy for music. FLAC files decompress 'on the fly' to recreate the original file to 100% accuracy. Nothing is lost.

__________________

Main system: Mac Mini 2011 • HRT II+ DAC • Lacie 3TB Cloudbox NAS • Marantz PM66 KI • EB Acoustics EB2

In storage: Thorens TD160 (no cart) • Cyrus 2 + PSX • Cyrus tuner • Technics SL-P777 • Marantz CD63KIS • Nakamichi DR-1

L00k_C's picture
Offline
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 238
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

The_Lhc]</p> <p>[quote=L00k_C wrote:
Isn't WAV 100% reproduction over FLAC which is 98%?

No! FLAC is LOSSLESS!!! Look at that word and have a think about what it means.

 

hammill's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Mar 2008
Posts: 2385
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

L00k_C]</p> <p>[quote=The_Lhc wrote:

L00k_C wrote:
Isn't WAV 100% reproduction over FLAC which is 98%?

No! FLAC is LOSSLESS!!! Look at that word and have a think about what it means.

Fair enough.. However I must have read it somewhere. Its not out of my head!

I will try and find the analysis with more details and stats.

 

So why are they saying that AFLAC is better than FLAC?

What the hell is AFLAC? Google thinks it is an insurance company.

The_Lhc's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 12588
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

L00k_C wrote:
So why are they saying that AFLAC is better than FLAC?

Do you mean ALAC? And who is "they"? I've never seen anyone claim that ALAC is better than FLAC (quite the opposite if anything). They both do the same thing, so in theory there wouldn't be any difference in SQ between them (or between them and WAV although you'll still get people claim there is. I don't buy it myself).

L00k_C's picture
Offline
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 238
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

The_Lhc wrote:

L00k_C wrote:
So why are they saying that AFLAC is better than FLAC?

Do you mean ALAC? And who is "they"? I've never seen anyone claim that ALAC is better than FLAC (quite the opposite if anything). They both do the same thing, so in theory there wouldn't be any difference in SQ between them (or between them and WAV although you'll still get people claim there is. I don't buy it myself).

Neuphonix wrote:

I use an apple so am in the process of doing all mine in ALAC. but FLAC is just as good.

MajorFubar's picture
Online
Joined: 3 Mar 2010
Posts: 3116
RE:

Apple Lossless (ALAC) and FLAC do basically the same job but ALAC will better suit your needs if you're an Apple user.

__________________

Main system: Mac Mini 2011 • HRT II+ DAC • Lacie 3TB Cloudbox NAS • Marantz PM66 KI • EB Acoustics EB2

In storage: Thorens TD160 (no cart) • Cyrus 2 + PSX • Cyrus tuner • Technics SL-P777 • Marantz CD63KIS • Nakamichi DR-1

L00k_C's picture
Offline
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 238
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

hammill]</p> <p>[quote=L00k_C wrote:

The_Lhc wrote:

L00k_C wrote:
Isn't WAV 100% reproduction over FLAC which is 98%?

No! FLAC is LOSSLESS!!! Look at that word and have a think about what it means.

Fair enough.. However I must have read it somewhere. Its not out of my head!

I will try and find the analysis with more details and stats.

 

So why are they saying that AFLAC is better than FLAC?

What the hell is AFLAC? Google thinks it is an insurance company.

 

doh!  ALAC   that is

The_Lhc's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 12588
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

L00k_C wrote:

The_Lhc wrote:

L00k_C wrote:
So why are they saying that AFLAC is better than FLAC?

Do you mean ALAC? And who is "they"? I've never seen anyone claim that ALAC is better than FLAC (quite the opposite if anything). They both do the same thing, so in theory there wouldn't be any difference in SQ between them (or between them and WAV although you'll still get people claim there is. I don't buy it myself).

Neuphonix wrote:

I use an apple so am in the process of doing all mine in ALAC. but FLAC is just as good.

ALAC is Apple's lossless codec, so they support that instead of FLAC but that's the only real difference.

formbypc's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Aug 2011
Posts: 30
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's...

EAC includes features whereby it optimises itself for the particular optical drive in use, and also supports Gracenote for tagging, and Accuraterip

The_Lhc's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 12588
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's...

formbypc wrote:

EAC includes features whereby it optimises itself for the particular optical drive in use, and also supports Gracenote for tagging, and Accuraterip

As does dbPowerAmp and it looks nicer!

big1986ben's picture
Offline
Joined: 8 Dec 2009
Posts: 20
RE: vortexbox

When i ripped all my cds i used an old laptop and installed vortexbox on it.

Very simple once installed - put a cd in it poped out when done. I placed it on the coffee table and did them slowly over a month or so. 

 

 

__________________

Vortexbox - Logitech Squeezebox Touch - Sony CMT-G1BiP - Audiostyle Z1 - QED Silver Anniversary XT

Panasonic TX-P42G20B - SKY HD - PS3 FAT 320GB HDD

Benedict_Arnold's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 741
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

hammill]</p> <p>[quote=L00k_C wrote:

The_Lhc wrote:

L00k_C wrote:
Isn't WAV 100% reproduction over FLAC which is 98%?

No! FLAC is LOSSLESS!!! Look at that word and have a think about what it means.

Fair enough.. However I must have read it somewhere. Its not out of my head!

I will try and find the analysis with more details and stats.

 

So why are they saying that AFLAC is better than FLAC?

What the hell is AFLAC? Google thinks it is an insurance company.

 

If you lived any time at all on this side of the Atlantic you'd know all about ****ing AFLAC.  it's an insurance company that specialises in providing cover to pay out if you have an acccident and can't work.  No Statutory Sick Pay here.  Their commercials are particularly annoying, featuring a white duck, who naturally responds "AFLAC" to every question asked, and whose butt most people would happily stuff an orange (or the "Mockneyed" accented GEICO - anothe rinsurance company - gecko) up Angry

MajorFubar's picture
Online
Joined: 3 Mar 2010
Posts: 3116
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

Benedict_Arnold wrote:
Their commercials are particularly annoying, featuring a white duck, who naturally responds "AFLAC" to every question asked, and whose butt most people would happily stuff an orange up |

lol! Post Of The Day excellent!

__________________

Main system: Mac Mini 2011 • HRT II+ DAC • Lacie 3TB Cloudbox NAS • Marantz PM66 KI • EB Acoustics EB2

In storage: Thorens TD160 (no cart) • Cyrus 2 + PSX • Cyrus tuner • Technics SL-P777 • Marantz CD63KIS • Nakamichi DR-1

Benedict_Arnold's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 741
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

BTW - I got corrected - converting to FLAC or any other "lossless" process isn't "lossless" - rather it's a case of "no more losses" becuase your starting poitn is usually a downsampled CD rather than the studio tapes (or files).

 

I wasn't aware dbPowerAmp had the capability to check scratched CDs against their library for clean copies - I'll have to give that a go....

hammill's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Mar 2008
Posts: 2385
RE: What is the best way to burn all my CD's to lossless audio

Benedict_Arnold wrote:

I wasn't aware dbPowerAmp had the capability to check scratched CDs against their library for clean copies - I'll have to give that a go....

I think what happens is that a checksum is taken for each track when  dbPowerAmp is used and these are recorded in a central database. If a number of rips get the same checksum then this is taken to be the "correct" rip (chances of two different rips with different contents getting the same checksum are miniscule) which is compared against the checksum from your rip. I have ripped 100's of CDs and had two bad checksums. The first was recovered after cleaning the errant CD, the second could not be recovered (and can be heard when playing the CD as a slight click).