SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

[GilGib]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

I don't know if you are interested in this. There are some discussions about Nero MP4 format may be as good or better than FLAC.
Linux Nero cost $20.00 and they offer a free trail. Does FLAC, Nero MP4 , MP3, AAC, Mpeg-4.

Check it out

[Oceanwatcher]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

Good questions. BTW - I take your point with Rubyripper. Gonna try to install it, just got A LOT of extra stuff on the install list when I first tried...

The quality of AccurateRip is dependent on the content of the database. This is the same as with the database that holds the names of the songs. If someone enters the name of the song with spelling mistakes, the next person will have that spelling mistake in their songlist over and over again until someone corrects the mistake.

From what I have understood so far, AccurateRip is a notch better in the way that you can submit your checksums to the database and as it builds, the chances of a correct result is bigger and bigger. But yes, if there is only one checksum there, and it is not correct, than you will get an error. I have to check the output of EAC to see if it reports a flat out error, or if it just say that according to the database, it is likely that there is a mistake in the rip.

I am not sure a comparison to a master recording is totally correct as the database is a compilation of checksums from rippings of the production CD. We are not talking about getting the ripping to be as close to the master as possible, we want to get it as close to the data on the production CD as possible, as this is the only thing available to us.

The master recordings are usually of a much higher quality. 24bit 192KHz is quite common now. And I love the fact that some recordings can actually be bought all the way up to that resolution now. One example from Norway:

http://www.2l.musikkonline.no/shop/d...m.asp?id=34188

Really nice stuff, and offered in an amazing variety of formats. The only format worse than MP3 here is CD

There is also something to be said about the format. FLAC is the format of choice for me as I am afraid that in the future, other formats might be a problem to play. So better stick to an open format... We already see the problems of DRM with shops closing down and leaving their customers in a difficult position with libraries of music that can not be moved off their current system. Unless they break the law and remove the DRM on their legally purchased music.

So I prefer to make a high quality FLAC and store this as my main source. Play this if the player support it, and downconvert it if it is to an MP3 only player. I am a music "addict" and my work involves video and audio editing.

[Oceanwatcher]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

I don't know if you are interested in this. There are some discussions about Nero MP4 format may be as good or better than FLAC.
Linux Nero cost $20.00 and they offer a free trail. Does FLAC, Nero MP4 , MP3, AAC, Mpeg-4.

I did not know that Nero had a Linux version. Thank you for the tip. I am also learning new things :-) But I will stay away from the Nero MP4 format. Unless it is a truly lossless format, there is no way it can be as good as FLAC.

When you are talking about lossless formats, one can not be better than the other in terms of the data coming out of a decompression (you can not play compressed audio - it always have to be decompressed). It is a bit like trying to compare two OpenOffice documents, one compressed with zip and the other compressed with rar. Once you view them, they are both uncompressed and there will be no difference in the quality of the text.

On the other hand, comparing jpeg compression and jpeg2000 compression will produce different results as some information is dropped in the compression process to make the files smaller. Once that compression is done, it is lost forever, and nothing can really restore it.

I do not imply that you don't already know this, just adding it to the thread :-)

[dibl]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

This is very interesting information -- I'm learning more than I ever knew.

When I rip CDs, I normally rip to .wav format. Understanding (more or less) that losses would occur in compression to mp3 or other compressed formats, I always assumed that the good old .wav file format was about the best I could get out of a CD. I have no idea about error-checking in K3b (or any other ripper), but I certainly agree that the output file will never be of any better quality than the source file.

Out of curiosity, I just opened one of my ripped .wav files in Audacity and examined its properties. Audacity indicates it is a "32-bit float" format, 44,100 Hz. I dunno the implications of 32-bit float -- prolly "better" in some sense than 16-bit, but I'm not sure what that translates to, in audio quality terms, especially when played through a 24-bit sound card, which is what the consumer products are.

Anyway, thanks for the info on FLAC. I guess if .wav ever appears to be a threatened format, I've got a 150GB conversion process waiting for me .... :P

[Oceanwatcher]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

Ripping to .wav gives you a file that is uncompressed. No compromises there :-) What you could gain by converting to FLAC is an approximate reduction of filesize of 50%.

Yes, Audacity and a number of other audio programs are now capable of using 32-bit float as their internal processing format. But as far as I know, no audio card is able to use this yet. So when you record through an audio card, you are limited by that cards hardware. But for internal processing, adding filters etc. , the software can use 32-bit float giving MUCH better quality in the process.

I am very impressed with the quality and variety of audio editing/music production software that exists for Linux. And Audacity has been on my list of programs I just MUST have for a long time. I carry the Windows version with me on a pen drive all the time.

[dibl]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

Here's an interesting dissertation on the topic of digital audio quality, hopefully entitled "Digital Audio Best Practices", although upon reviewing it I found the phrase "... may be" used where I wish it had said "is":

http://www.bcr.org/cdp/best/digital-audio-bp.pdf

I vaguely recall reading this, or a predecessor guideline, before I launched a digitization project, using a Ubuntu "realtime" kernel, in 2007, to capture a collection of 78 RPM recordings. If you want to end up scratching your head, check out the equalization methods for 78 RPM records.

[Oceanwatcher]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

A very interesting document! However, it was made in 2006 and the development in digital audio is rapid, so just keep that in mind when you read it. They mention 96KHz, but not 192KHz. And 24 bit should be available on much more consumer equipment today.

When it comes to deciding what sampling rate and bit depth to go for when recording, my recommendation is always to use the highest you can. You are recording it for use in the future, and you know the development gives you more of the tools you need. The fact that some sounds do not require more than a certain bit depth should not keep you from going for the absolutely best recording you can make. You might want to process the sound further after the recording and the better the the signal is, the more accurate processing you can do.

I also scan photos, and I sometimes hear people saying that you do not need a high resolution for a "bad" photo. And my respons is always "The opposite is true!" The worse the picture is, the more accurate you want the scan to be so you can work on it later without adding to the problems. Especially if you are thinkning about making a compressed version of the photo or the audio later. Noise is the worst enemy of compression. And a bad recording/scan adds to that.

Having the age of the document in mind, it is a very good introduction to many audio concepts and best practices.

It was a bit fun looking at the picture in the "born digital" part. The audio device there is a Digidesign Mbox and I have one of those right next to me here. But as there are no Linux drivers for it, I have to switch to Windows to be able to use it. In Windows there are both ASIO and and other drivers for it. But originally, it was a hardware/software solution that only supported ProTools LE. On the other hand, in another PC here, I have an RME Hammerfall that has excellent drivers in Linux. I use it connected to my digital audio console (mixer) via optical fiber.

Their warning about storing on optical media is also very wise to notice. I have seen tests that show some noname cd's to be completely unreadable in as little as 8 months. That is scary... And also why I prefer using harddisks with optical as a backup that is renewed now and then. A server with mirrored harddrives will prevent a lot of future disasters! I have already performed a couple of restorations for friends that has lost pictures...

One thing that becomes very obvious is that I can not find any mention of any opensource projects in this paper. And no mention of FLAC. That should have been natural in a project like this.

Also, I love the checklist of questions towards the end. :-)

Sorry for going off in a lot of directions in this post. I liked the document a lot and have saved it for future reference.

[jankushka]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

don't know.
but you can ask the folks at cdparanoia directly.
their web site is easily found.
you also can find some good info about this topic/discussion here.
hth

[KeithZG]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

Anyway, thanks for the info on FLAC. I guess if .wav ever appears to be a threatened format, I've got a 150GB conversion process waiting for me .... :P

I'm really not sure why you would use .wav.... if you rip to FLAC, or even just convert, since it's an entirely lossless format you can convert back and forth with WAV files without any change. You can in fact restore the exact original wave file, which is often how audiophiles check accuracy and completeness, especially with live music recordings (I know at places like bt.etree.org and dimeadozen the checksums that are posted often used to be for the waves while the shared files themselves are 99.9% FLAC).

Plus the metadata situation is a lot nicer for FLAC, since FLAC was made with metadata in mind whereas it's a bit of a hack/add-on for WAV. Furthermore since WAV can theoretically contain non-PCM audio streams, when one just sees a .wav file one can't be 100% sure of it. There are other reasons, but my own main draw is since FLAC is often half (more often for me it seems to be a third) of the size of WAV files, well, I'm actually quite perplexed why one would use WAV.

(BTW, I rather like this thread, a lot of it is information I've found out the hard way over years of being obsessive-compulsive with FLAC and rips yet mainly using Linux, so it's nice to see a single thread in these here forums encapsulate it all!)

[dibl]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

my own main draw is since FLAC is often half (more often for me it seems to be a third) of the size of WAV files, well, I'm actually quite perplexed why one would use WAV.

Well ... speed and simplicity come to mind (especially to the person not familiar with the durability of FLAC) -- I filled up a 200GB hard drive with audio files and did not want to spend any time at all fiddling with anything. As to space saving -- hard drive space is $12 USD per 100GB -- why would anyone spend scarce evenings and weekend time converting files to save hard drive space?

[KeithZG]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

Well ... speed and simplicity come to mind (especially to the person not familiar with the durability of FLAC) -- I filled up a 200GB hard drive with audio files and did not want to spend any time at all fiddling with anything. As to space saving -- hard drive space is $12 USD per 100GB -- why would anyone spend scarce evenings and weekend time converting files to save hard drive space?

Oh, I didn't catch that you hadn't known about it at all! I guess I assumed that everyone who delved deep enough into open source software would've known all about FLAC, heh, I never really thought about it (I was ripping things to FLAC years before I switched over to Linux, we're talking Windows 98, so I had unconscious assumptions).

Still, even if hard drive space is cheap it ain't unlimited. And hey, isn't it harder to open up a case and fiddle around then to tell a script to run? Really, if you have an entire hard drive full you should be able to just tell some program to let loose and convert them all; then you've got another hard drive's worth of space!

For metadata and such FLAC is easier to deal with, and I haven't used any ripping/encoding programs since around uhhh 2003 that didn't have an option for FLAC just as simple as WAV, so "simplicity" isn't really applicable. And for speed and for spending "evenings and weekend time"... you don't have to sit there staring at the progress bar while it goes

[flarson]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

To tell the script to run the script must exist and you have to know what it is and how to get it. If you have to create the script, or find it you will invest some weekend and evening time. Can you tell us what script, where to get it, and how to use it?

[tomp01]

Re: What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu?


I agree, K3B is as good as Nero anyday.

[/quote]

Is there anything wrong with K3b? It worked a treat, the last time I needed to rip a CD.
[/quote]

[KeithZG]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

To tell the script to run the script must exist and you have to know what it is and how to get it. If you have to create the script, or find it you will invest some weekend and evening time. Can you tell us what script, where to get it, and how to use it?

Sure

...although this has drifted fairly off-topic now, heh (and I was really hoping for something else to pop up in the "replacement for EAC" department, although it looks like RubyRipper does the trick).

Firstly, creating such a script really would be dead easy for the most part. The final 1% of the script would probably be 80% of the effort, heh, by which I mean the question of preserving the metadata and deleting the files as we go.

So far I'm unsure whether dibl's WAV files are stored with any metadata at all, and if so, howso, since as noted one of the main advantages of FLAC is that it natively supports metadata, whereas WAV doesn't so there's literally dozens of entirely different hacks for doing so. That being said, as long as the metadata is stored in the files themselves we should be able to at least preserve it in the sense that decoding back to WAV will leave it intact, even if I suspect the below script won't import it into the FLAC tags. I'm also wary of deleting files as you go since I suck at bash scripting but luckily the flac encoder has a flag for handling that itself.

Unfortunately, the --delete-input-file and --keep-foreign-metadata flags are still mutually exclusive, as no new versions of FLAC have been released since 1.2.1 So the solution is outside of my abilities for a 10-minute quick peek around.

Here's my quick hack of a way, with just making the files and no attempts at metadata :

#!/bin/bash
 find | grep .wav | while read LINE ; do
 DIR=$(dirname "$LINE")
 FILE=$(basename "$LINE")
 flac -8 "${DIR}/${FILE}"
 done

Attempting to preserve the metadata:

#!/bin/bash
#Script cobbled ineptly together by KeithZG
#Script license: GPL v3
#Also licensed under: WTFPLv2 ([url]http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/[/url])
 find | grep .wav | while read LINE ; do
 DIR=$(dirname "$LINE")
 FILE=$(basename "$LINE")
 flac --keep-foreign-metadata -8 "${DIR}/${FILE}"
 done

Screw foreign metadata, just take what you can from the file and make it FLAC:

#!/bin/bash
#Script cobbled ineptly together by KeithZG
#Script license: GPL v3
#Also licensed under the imaginary "FLAC is awesome, WAV is soooo 1998" license
 find | grep .wav | while read LINE ; do
 DIR=$(dirname "$LINE")
 FILE=$(basename "$LINE")
 flac --delete-input-file -8 "${DIR}/${FILE}"
 done

Obviously this is all very amateur of me, but simply dropping it into the top directory and running it from the terminal should do exactly what's at stake here.

So for example, say you've got a whole drive or partition of ancient files just begging to be converted and you have it mounted on /media/ChangeIsScary, well then just copy the above text, right-click with Konqueror on the main directory there and go "Paste Clipboard Contents" (at least, do so once KDE4 finally re-implements that, haha) and call it wav2flac.sh. Then just open your favourite terminal emulator (like LXTerminal or Konsole):

user@computer:~$ cd /media/ChangeIsScary
user@computer:/media/ChangeIsScary$ bash wav2flac.sh

Tada!

Other way more flexible and professional scripts for conversion include this one: http://legroom.net/software/convtoflac. Also, another better way might be to just open up Konqueror, search for *.wav, and then drag-drop all the results into soundKonverter, which you can probably tell from the name is a KDE audio transcoding program;

sudo aptitude install soundkonverter

Even if not doing anything as drastic as re-encoding everything on a drive, soundKonverter is a program worth looking into, it has stuff like a cue sheet editor and etc, very cool and very typical KDE program (ie. very easy to use but with plentiful and powerful options).

Yet another option is to use this Amarok plugin which converts all the files in your current playlist into whatever else you want them as. The major caveat is that it won't delete the existing files and it only works on the previous stable branch of Amarok, not the beta new one (as I'm calling 2.x until it stops crashing and/or lets me do the basic stuff like drag/drop from the playlist into a file manager, heh). Still, another option. I remember back in the day noticing a plugin for transcoding one's entire library, but I can't seem to find it now.

Oh, and for a decent discussion about why FLAC is nicer than WAV (that then veers off into questions of hearing and tube amps): http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=65947

/offtopic

[abalone]

Re: SOLVED via WORKAROUND - What is the best CD ripper for Kubuntu? EAC in WindowsXP

A very interesting document! However, it was made in 2006 and the development in digital audio is rapid, so just keep that in mind when you read it. They mention 96KHz, but not 192KHz. And 24 bit should be available on much more consumer equipment today.

When it comes to deciding what sampling rate and bit depth to go for when recording, my recommendation is always to use the highest you can. You are recording it for use in the future, and you know the development gives you more of the tools you need. The fact that some sounds do not require more than a certain bit depth should not keep you from going for the absolutely best recording you can make. You might want to process the sound further after the recording and the better the the signal is, the more accurate processing you can do.

I also scan photos, and I sometimes hear people saying that you do not need a high resolution for a "bad" photo. And my respons is always "The opposite is true!" The worse the picture is, the more accurate you want the scan to be so you can work on it later without adding to the problems. Especially if you are thinkning about making a compressed version of the photo or the audio later. Noise is the worst enemy of compression. And a bad recording/scan adds to that.

Having the age of the document in mind, it is a very good introduction to many audio concepts and best practices.

It was a bit fun looking at the picture in the "born digital" part. The audio device there is a Digidesign Mbox and I have one of those right next to me here. But as there are no Linux drivers for it, I have to switch to Windows to be able to use it. In Windows there are both ASIO and and other drivers for it. But originally, it was a hardware/software solution that only supported ProTools LE. On the other hand, in another PC here, I have an RME Hammerfall that has excellent drivers in Linux. I use it connected to my digital audio console (mixer) via optical fiber.

Their warning about storing on optical media is also very wise to notice. I have seen tests that show some noname cd's to be completely unreadable in as little as 8 months. That is scary... And also why I prefer using harddisks with optical as a backup that is renewed now and then. A server with mirrored harddrives will prevent a lot of future disasters! I have already performed a couple of restorations for friends that has lost pictures...

One thing that becomes very obvious is that I can not find any mention of any opensource projects in this paper. And no mention of FLAC. That should have been natural in a project like this.

Also, I love the checklist of questions towards the end. :-)

Sorry for going off in a lot of directions in this post. I liked the document a lot and have saved it for future reference.

May I ask a related question? I'm not often in the same room with someone who would know...

My on-board sound only does 48 kHz. If I recorded at 96 kHz would I get a 48 kHz quality recording that's nonetheless "padded out" with (so to speak) redundant data? Would that be of any use re: editing?

However, when I record something with Audacity (say: vinyl or "instrumental noise" I do want to edit later on) I can't use a Project Rate of 96 kHz because the recording will abort after a second or two.

When I record at 48 kHz, but change the Project Rate to 96 kHz afterwards, it'll still say "Actual Rate: 48000" in the corner - and I'm not sure what that means. Will editing be done at 96 kHz resolution or not?

(When I change the sample rate of an individual track to 96 kHz it'll also comply, but speed/pitch go up accordingly.)

Does it make any technical sense, with Audacity, to record at a Project Rate of 48 kHz and change it to 96 kHz after the fact? (Does anything I said make any sense?)

I want a better soundcard, but I'm afraid to lose the current "sound pretty much just works" state (i.e. I can have Wine, Amarok, Flash, JACK & other stuff play sound at the same time, without PulseAudio or extra dmix tricks or anything like that. I don't know about the surround jacks or digital out... never actually tried)