Suggestions for cd ripper...mp3 or wav?
Greg Frith
gfrith at gmail.com
Sat Sep 30 07:53:30 UTC 2006
On 29 Sep 2006, at 15:54, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 26/09/06, Daniel Hedlund <daniel at digitree.org> wrote:
>>
>> R. G. Newbury wrote:
>> > I'm also looking for comments on the relative advantages of
>> ripping to
>> > mp3 versus wav files and the 'best' software to play those files
>> back
>> > from the harddrive.
>>
>
>> the FLAC audio format provides exactly the same quality (lossless) as
>> the WAV format but are only a fraction of the size. Compatibility
>> with
>> audio applications is medium to low...but for lossless
>> compression, it's
>> worth it over WAV.
>
> Of course, if you have a flac, you can make a lossy copy of it any
> time
> you want (e.g. keep flac on your hard disc and use it to make mp3s
> for a portable player). So compatibility isn't so much of an
> issue. If
> I rip anything that's going to be difficult to re-rip (e.g. vinyl),
> I'll keep a
> flac copy. That way I can go back to the recording.
>
>> - the MP3 audio format provides a very close (but lossy) version
>> of your
>> audio. Filesize tends to be a fair bit smaller than FLAC (maybe half
>> the size with default 128k settings). MP3 support does not work
>> out of
>
> 168 or 192kbps is a better choice. Of course it depends whether you
> can hear the difference, but I used to find 128kbps mp3 didn't sound
> great.
>
>> the box with Fedora due to certain patent/licensing restrictions.
>> MP3s
>> are very compatible with portable devices and audio application on
>> other
>> operating systems (iTunes, Windows Media Player, etc).
>>
>> - the OGG Vorbis audio format provides a very close (but lossy)
>> version
>> of your audio. Some people argue that it's a little better
>> quality than
>> MP3, but they're close enough for most people. Filesizes tend to be
>> slightly smaller or about the same as MP3. The big difference
>> between
>
> Depends what bit-rate you use, some people will claim you can do
> lower bitrates with Vorbis at the same sound quality, some (a very
> few)
> will claim the other way around.
>
>> the two is the OGG vorbis support is much better under Linux
>> because it
>> doesn't have any patent/licensing problems. However, portable
>> devices
>> and audio players under other operating systems are not very
>> compatible.
>> You'd probably need to download a special audio player or codec
>> under
>> Windows to play them for example.
>>
>
> Winamp will play out of the box, most of the other major players
> (RP, QT,
> WMP) have plugins available. Many of the more community based players
> (foobar, MuiskCube, VLC) support Ogg/Vorbis natively.
>
> The big problem is usually hardware, though this is getting better,
> with
> most quality manufacturers supporting Ogg/Vorbis (there is one
> glaring exception of course but, let's face it, they're overhyped
> anyway).
>
Hi all,
I note the conversation creeping into bitrate/quality territory... A
quick comment: I'm currently in the process of re-ripping my entire
CD collection at 196k from the prior 128k as I now use the audio on
SD Cards in a BOSE stereo system in my car. I don't play music
thumping or loud!, but with a relatively untrained ear can here the
difference on classical and mainstream. This difference wasn't
audible on my... err, ipod. :-). In short there isn't a lot of
filesize difference, space is relatively cheap, so don't waste time
with lesser bit rates now.
Greg.
> --
> imalone
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
--
Greg Frith
gfrith at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20060930/9ba398af/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list