PDA

View Full Version : Mac OS X Ripping Options



webby
22-11-2009, 23:11
Hi,

I want to read up on other users thoughts and experiences with Max, the mac cd ripper/file converter, but when I search the forum it returns no searches. I think this may be cos it's only 3 characters cos the same happens when I search for ps3.

What can I do?

sburrell
23-11-2009, 03:52
Hi,

Max starts appearing in post #45 in this (http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=367&page=5) thread.
Are you looking for a CD ripper? Eventually, at post #69, Tr@nz indicates EAC may be a better choice, and I have to agree with them. However, I note you have a G5 so Boot Camping and installing Windows XP is out of the question, which leaves you with Max. All I can say is that, ideally, what you want, IMHO, is EAC running on a computer equipped with a drive that reports c2 error correction data. This drastically improves rip speed and quality.
On the other hand, you might want to check out Rip (http://sbooth.org/Rip/), by the same developer. It appears to support c2 error correction on drives that report it. It is beta software however. Read the forums (http://forums.sbooth.org/viewforum.php?f=21) for further details.
If you just want an audio file converter, I use Max for this. I use it to create ALAC (Apple Lossless) files from my EAC-created WAVs. Max is fast, ripping files simultaneously if you ask it to, and allows manual tagging before transcoding. It can grab a little too much CPU while it encodes, causing stuttering in your other apps, but only a little (and then, that's possibly because I set it to encode two files at a time). The interface is a little complicated---for example, you set up your output encode formats in Preferences. However, it's become a firm part of my ripping workflow.

Hope this helps.:)

webby
23-11-2009, 09:06
Thanks Simon. Actually, I have a C2D imac now, but I aint installing windows on it for no one!

Thanks for the info.

Sometimes I think to hell with it and just rip using itunes.

webby
23-11-2009, 10:40
After a good old read, it appears that ripping options for a mac are:
iTunes
Max (http://sbooth.org/Max/)
Rip (http://sbooth.org/Rip/)
Xact (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/14246)
and XLD (http://tmkk.hp.infoseek.co.jp/xld/index_e.html)

I just thought I'd gather them here.

Can any of these rip to iTunes and fill in tag info, other than iTunes of course? Do I really need the 2 step process Simon stated above, or can I just rip to ALAC? I find all the options a bit bewildering to be honest.

sburrell
23-11-2009, 21:49
Hi there,

Just thought I'd post my impressions of Rip, which I've just tried with a couple of CDs on my iMac.

Positives:
Rips straight to ALAC.
Automatically tags tracks using Gracenote (though it refers to it as iTunes)
Allows manual editing of tags prior to ripping, including artwork.
Very comprehensive log data.

Negatives:
Slower than EAC - reads every track twice by default (or as many times as you specify in Preferences).
Automatic read offset detection didn't work for me.
Adding the read offset manually doesn't appear to work - not reflected in the log.
Choosing the Read Log option after ripping opens the Console log, not the text log directly relating to the just-performed rip.
Doesn't save the tracks to the Finder until the entire CD has finished ripping (I found this really disconcerting).
Reports are that an error in ripping will cause that track and all previous, successful rips to be deleted without chance of recovery. Experience has shown this to be the case with one CD already.
Poor use of the AccurateRip database - only 4 or 5 tracks were verified by the database, where EAC's implementation was able to verify them all.

On the whole, Rip did not inspire confidence in the quality of the resultant rip. EAC does, and that's vital for me.

I'll report back on the others if I can be *rsed. Maybe a case of "better the devil you know." ;)

lovejoy
23-11-2009, 21:58
I've been using XLD exclusively for the last 6 months or so.

It's nice and quick (given the quality of the Mac CD drives which I don't think are really up to much), it uses AccurateRip like EAC does, it will rip to WAV, MP3 (LAME), Apple Lossless, AIFF, AAC (including HE-AAC), FLAC, WavPack and Ogg. It will also import your rips straight into your iTunes library.

If I have one minor gripe with it, it won't automatically go and grab the disc details from FreeDB as soon as you insert the disc - are you listening XLD developers?

Otherwise it's the best one I have used on a Mac.

webby
23-11-2009, 22:28
Yes, I tried a disc with XLD earlier today. I ripped to ALAC and it added the files straight to itunes, fully tagged up, although I had to set it to do that. Then I just found the album art myself.

snapper
25-11-2009, 18:01
Another vote for XLD.

When properly set up you may find some discs sound better when ripped and burned to a CDr.

:confused:

Make sure you have 'offset correction value' configured properly.

http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm

HTH

Themis
25-11-2009, 19:07
When properly set up you may find some discs sound better when ripped and burned to a CDr.

:confused:
I guess, damaged discs sound worse than freshly written ones, because of the interpolation circuitry ? ;)

Spur07
25-11-2009, 19:30
I used to use MAX, but now use XLD. The only problem I've found with XLD is that when it searches for cover artwork the quality usually isn't very good. I tend to pick my own. Still use MAX for converting files - very useful software imo.

SteveW
26-11-2009, 16:21
Another vote for XLD.

When properly set up you may find some discs sound better when ripped and burned to a CDr.

:confused:

Make sure you have 'offset correction value' configured properly.

http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm

HTH


Out of pure curiosity, I tried this.

Ripped a CD to FLAC using XLD on my old G5 iMac.
Then using Toast Titanium, burnt to a CDr.

It sounds better. Not dramatically, but more defintion to instruments etc.

How the bloody hell does this work?? Not only :confused: but :scratch::scratch::scratch:

It might help explain some other stuff. ie Linn claims.

Can someone else try this to see what they reckon.

Themis
26-11-2009, 16:39
When a disk is (lightly) scratched, there are some data read errors.
On a computer, the CD device re-reads automatically the defective sectors trying to get the right data (sometimes by changing the spinning speed).
On home CD players, the CD device does not re-read defective sectors : instead, the redbook(CD) specification defines the algorithms to recover the lost data (using interleave and interpolation). The interpolation algorithm is not bit-perfect in regards to the recorded data : it "invents" the missing data.

A freshly burnt disk has less errors, and probably no interpolation errors at all.
This may explain some differences.

SteveW
26-11-2009, 17:39
When a disk is (lightly) scratched, there are some data read errors.
On a computer, the CD device re-reads automatically the defective sectors trying to get the right data (sometimes by changing the spinning speed).
On home CD players, the CD device does not re-read defective sectors : instead, the redbook(CD) specification defines the algorithms to recover the lost data (using interleave and interpolation). The interpolation algorithm is not bit-perfect in regards to the recorded data : it "invents" the missing data.

A freshly burnt disk has less errors, and probably no interpolation errors at all.
This may explain some differences.

Haven't a clue what you are talking about...but it sounds plausible !!:)

Themis
26-11-2009, 17:58
Haven't a clue what you are talking about...but it sounds plausible !!:)
Put simply, an old (slightly scratched CD) may sound slightly worse than the same CD when it was new.
A freshly burnt CD sounds more like the CD the day you bought it. Nevertheless, it will end up being scratched, too, eventually... ;)

SteveW
26-11-2009, 19:29
Put simply, an old (slightly scratched CD) may sound slightly worse than the same CD when it was new.
A freshly burnt CD sounds more like the CD the day you bought it. Nevertheless, it will end up being scratched, too, eventually... ;)


....but...but.... the man said ... "Perfect Sound, Forever."

webby
26-11-2009, 19:41
But Ian McCulloch said 'Nothing Ever Lasts Forever'..... :)

webby
29-11-2009, 21:51
Would I be correct in assuming that converting Flac to Apple Lossless is (essentially) the same as ripping to Apple Lossless in the first place?

Themis
29-11-2009, 22:02
Would I be correct in assuming that converting Flac to Apple Lossless is (essentially) the same as ripping to Apple Lossless in the first place?
Yes. You can convert to/back any lossless format and get exactly the same file. No worries. ;)

webby
03-12-2009, 18:47
Probably discussion for another thread, but since I got my AE, I've ripped in AAC 320kbps VBR constrained with XLD, and Apple Lossless, and I can't tell a difference yet. The ALAC file is 8 times bigger, not that I'm looking to save space, I'm just saying.

lovejoy
03-12-2009, 18:55
I was happy for years ripping everything using EAC and compressing everything with LAME V0 - Giving me the highest quality variable bit rate MP3s you can get. The blessing/curse of all of the cumulative improvements to my 7510 & Caiman has meant that I've been increasingly able to spot the difference between these MP3s and lossless rips and slowly but surely, MP3s are being replaced by ALAC.

I say if you've got the space, use ALAC, you'll save a lot of time in the long run. Rip small, rip twice. How's that for a mantra?

webby
03-12-2009, 18:58
I believe.

Much like buy cheap, buy twice.

Themis
03-12-2009, 19:42
Probably discussion for another thread, but since I got my AE, I've ripped in AAC 320kbps VBR constrained with XLD, and Apple Lossless, and I can't tell a difference yet. The ALAC file is 8 times bigger, not that I'm looking to save space, I'm just saying.
Imho, it clearly depends on the mastering quality. I agree that it's hard, and it's still harder with AAC400VBR, especially when listening through headphones.
Nevertheless, for some albums, the difference is noticeable.
In any case, HD terrabyte value is melting like ice-cream in summer sun... no point in bothering about file size, really. ;)

webby
03-12-2009, 21:59
What differences would an external DAC make to this? Would that highlight the differences more?

Themis
03-12-2009, 22:03
What differences would an external DAC make to this? Would that highlight the differences more?
Compared with your Airport Express ? Well, it depends. Being conservative, the differences are not so big, but they will be noticeable with your favorite albums, I bet. Still you'll need a recent/good dac (like the Caiman). ;)

webby
10-01-2010, 17:18
I'm now using XLD to rip my CDs to iTunes in ALAC. Does anyone know how I can replace tracks I've previously ripped at a lower bitrate, therefore retaining any tags I may have modified?

sburrell
10-01-2010, 18:19
Tags are embedded into the track files themselves. The best way to transfer them is to use one of Doug's Applescripts, here (http://dougscripts.com/itunes/scripts/ss.php?sp=copytinforackstotracks).

webby
10-01-2010, 18:28
Oh right. How come iTunes can replace tracks?

Hang on, I may need to check this.... :doh:

sburrell
10-01-2010, 18:51
A similar discussion has played out here (http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20080812213131421).

webby
11-01-2010, 06:49
Hmmm, I just ripped a track @ 256 with itunes, modified some tags and added artwork. I then re-ripped at ALAC and chose 'replace'. It replaced the track but kept the tags and artwork.

I then ripped with XLD with 'overwrite existing files' and 'add to itunes' selected. This added the track alongside my iTunes ripped one. The overwrite option doesn't seem to work.

sburrell
11-01-2010, 19:50
Hi,

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_gXAKzRcxI1U/S0t9Ye1_VvI/AAAAAAAAAOs/BCf7aUqGtjY/s800/Screen%20shot%202010-01-11%20at%2019.31.51.png

Are these the options you're talking about? I don't think they're linked. The "Overwrite" refers to when XLD rips to its own destination folder. The "Add…" simply passes the file to iTunes, I think, which deals with it according to its own settings---that's why you end up with a duplicate instead of a replacement.


Hmmm, I just ripped a track @ 256 with itunes, modified some tags and added artwork. I then re-ripped at ALAC and chose 'replace'. It replaced the track but kept the tags and artwork.
Out of curiosity, how did you add the artwork---by dragging-and-dropping onto the Album Artwork Viewer or by the Get Album Artwork option in the Advanced menu? The latter adds the artwork to a folder (Music > iTunes > Album Artwork), and iTunes links to it when necessary; the former appends the artwork to the file itself.

webby
11-01-2010, 21:41
Hi,

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_gXAKzRcxI1U/S0t9Ye1_VvI/AAAAAAAAAOs/BCf7aUqGtjY/s800/Screen%20shot%202010-01-11%20at%2019.31.51.png

Are these the options you're talking about? I don't think they're linked. The "Overwrite" refers to when XLD rips to its own destination folder. The "Add…" simply passes the file to iTunes, I think, which deals with it according to its own settings---that's why you end up with a duplicate instead of a replacement.

Yes, but mine look slightly different, maybe you have an earlier version. Thanks for clearing that up.


Out of curiosity, how did you add the artwork---by dragging-and-dropping onto the Album Artwork Viewer or by the Get Album Artwork option in the Advanced menu? The latter adds the artwork to a folder (Music > iTunes > Album Artwork), and iTunes links to it when necessary; the former appends the artwork to the file itself.

I add it to the artwork panel of the iTunes get info window, not the XLD panel if that's what you meant by Album Artwork Viewer. Incidentally, I get most of the artwork from Album Art Exchange, very nice resource.

Even so, my sort tag remained when I replaced a track using iTunes rip.

Cheers

webby
27-01-2010, 00:14
To continue in this thread.....

I'm pretty set on using XLD for my ripping cos it uses the AccurateRip database. I was about to bin it because it involved a couple more steps than just ripping with iTunes but when I ripped in iTunes with the error correction on, it took a lot longer than XLD.

I have the output directory set to my iTunes folder so they go straight into my iTunes library. All I have to do is add artwork. The only setting I'm not sure about is ReplayGain? What is that and should I use it?

Also, now that I've decided to rip all my CDs, do any of you have any tips? Did you rip everything to lossless? Did you selectively rip to lossy for those less essential albums?
Did you decide that you never want to hear certain CDs again and choose to not rip those discs, or is it a case of 'you've got it, so why not rip it'?

I'd be interested to hear your tactics and methods.

Cheers, and goodnight for now.

webby
27-01-2010, 00:19
I've been using XLD exclusively for the last 6 months or so.

If I have one minor gripe with it, it won't automatically go and grab the disc details from FreeDB as soon as you insert the disc - are you listening XLD developers?



It should do that, that's what I've found, I'm sure of it. Check the preferences for 'automatically open disc on insertion' under the CD RIP tab, and 'automatically connect to CDDB' under the CDDB tab. You may need to check the 'don't prompt if multiple candidates are found' button too.

snapper
27-01-2010, 00:19
To continue in this thread.....

ReplayGain? What is that and should I use it?




If you tick the ReplayGain box when ripping a CD,it will give you the track peak levels in your log file.

Very handy when comparing different CD pressings.

webby
27-01-2010, 00:22
If you tick the ReplayGain box when ripping a CD,it will give you the track peak levels in your log file.

Very handy when comparing different CD pressings.

Oh, so it makes no alterations to the file then?

snapper
27-01-2010, 00:25
Oh, so it makes no alterations to the file then?


Not that I'm aware of.

twelvebears
27-01-2010, 07:08
Hey Lee.

You are aware that iTunes has an error correction option built in? It's not checked by default as obviously this causes it to read and re-read any damaged sections of a disc, and I'm sure it's not technically as fastidious as EAC or other specialist software, but I use iTunes with error correction enabled to rip all my music to Apple Lossless and have been very happy with the results.

Plus of course it's very, very straight forward and iTunes does a good job at tagging all the tracks properly.

The only thing to be aware of is that iTunes DOESN'T embed album artwork in the ID3 tag by default (it stores it in the referenced iTunes library) but can be forced to do so, which is what I've done.

webby
27-01-2010, 07:53
Hey Lee.

You are aware that iTunes has an error correction option built in? It's not checked by default as obviously this causes it to read and re-read any damaged sections of a disc, and I'm sure it's not technically as fastidious as EAC or other specialist software, but I use iTunes with error correction enabled to rip all my music to Apple Lossless and have been very happy with the results.

Plus of course it's very, very straight forward and iTunes does a good job at tagging all the tracks properly.

The only thing to be aware of is that iTunes DOESN'T embed album artwork in the ID3 tag by default (it stores it in the referenced iTunes library) but can be forced to do so, which is what I've done.

Yes, I wrote above: 'I was about to bin it because it involved a couple more steps than just ripping with iTunes but when I ripped in iTunes with the error correction on, it took a lot longer than XLD.'

Don't you find it takes a long time?

How do you add your artwork? I add mine by selecting all tracks in the album, get info, and paste the artwork to the artwork box. Does that embed it?

webby
27-01-2010, 07:59
By the way, I spotted a nice little iTunes tip yesterday; the little arrows next to the song, artist and album names take you directly to the iTunes store right?, but, if you alt-click them, you can single out that artist, or album, depending on which arrow you click. Very handy if you want to listen to just one album, or if you want to edit some tags for an artist.

twelvebears
27-01-2010, 08:38
Yes, I wrote above: 'I was about to bin it because it involved a couple more steps than just ripping with iTunes but when I ripped in iTunes with the error correction on, it took a lot longer than XLD.'

Don't you find it takes a long time?

How do you add your artwork? I add mine by selecting all tracks in the album, get info, and paste the artwork to the artwork box. Does that embed it?
To be honest, I didn't really notice that ripping was any slower than without error correction switched on unless the disc was noticeably marked, i.e. a spanky new disc would rip just as fast with or without error correction.

Are you using the internal 'Superdrive' drive in your iMac to rip with? If so, this will make things slow because they are speed limited to keep them quiet.

I just went to PC world and bought a cheap USB drive and used that to do the bulk of my ripping.

Oh and yes, selecting all tracks for an album, right click 'Get Info' and then editing info and pasting artwork in the box does embed it properly in the ID3 tag. Very useful in case anything happens to your library...

webby
27-01-2010, 08:48
Yep, using the internal, and yes I can concur with your comments. The disc I first tested on must've been difficult. Others have been just as quick as XLD.

All artwork from albumartexchange, great resource in case you didn't know.

webby
27-01-2010, 14:55
One of my discs won't rip. My imac will NOT read the last track on Crowded House's Farewell to the World disc 1. I've tried with all the ripping software I have but the drive just won't read it. The disc is mint and has never been played!

Does anyone have a copy they could rip to FLAC or ALAC and send it to me? ;)

Themis
27-01-2010, 19:00
Oh, so it makes no alterations to the file then?
A replay gain is a tag value, which can be used by the player to lower/boost the output, so that all albums/songs sound the same averagely.
There are two values : a "song replay gain" and an "album replay gain" (kind of average value of the songs of the album).

The file is altered in the way that one(or two) additional tags are appended to it.

Beechwoods
27-01-2010, 20:59
Bah! You beat me to it Dimitri!

As you said, Replaygain just sets tags that tell your player how to alter the playback gain to achieve consistent (normalised) level playback across all songs or an album. It's good in that you can switch it on or off and it doesn't actually alter the sampling or amplitude of the file itself.

It's a clever way of pleasing everyone all the time!

snapper
28-01-2010, 11:19
Sorry for the confusion,I thought you meant ReplayGain in XLD,not iTunes.

webby
28-01-2010, 15:02
Sorry for the confusion,I thought you meant ReplayGain in XLD,not iTunes.

I did.

snapper
28-01-2010, 16:58
I did.

In that case,it won't affect playback.

When using XLD,do you save the log?

EG.1


Track 1
Pink Floyd - Wish You Were Here (1975) - [FLAC] {OOP 35DP-4 Upgrade}\01 - Shine on You Crazy Diamond (Parts 1-5) - Welcome to the Machine.wav

Pre-gap length 0:00:02.00

Peak level 69.5 %
Track quality 99.9 %
Test CRC 052FDD9C
Copy CRC 052FDD9C
Copy OK

Track 2
Pink Floyd - Wish You Were Here (1975) - [FLAC] {OOP 35DP-4 Upgrade}\02 - Have a Cigar - Wish You Were Here - Shine on You Crazy Diamond (Parts 6-9).wav

Pre-gap length 0:00:02.28

Peak level 83.6 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Test CRC 914B717F
Copy CRC 914B717F
Copy OK


EG.2


Track 1
Shine On You Crazy Diamond (Part One).wav

Pre-gap length 0:00:02.00

Peak level 94.9 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Test CRC A52532E3
Copy CRC A52532E3
Copy OK

Track 2
Welcome To The Machine.wav

Peak level 100.0 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Test CRC 661FD4AB
Copy CRC 661FD4AB
Copy OK

Track 3
Have A Cigar.wav

Pre-gap length 0:00:00.13

Peak level 95.1 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Test CRC EBCE3002
Copy CRC EBCE3002
Copy OK

Track 4
Wish You Were Here.wav

Peak level 90.5 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Test CRC F00F940B
Copy CRC F00F940B
Copy OK

Track 5
Shine On You Crazy Diamond (Part Two).wav

Peak level 88.5 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Test CRC 8413FA9A
Copy CRC 8413FA9A
Copy OK


As you can see from these examples,this is the same album,but different pressings,as can be seen with the peak levels.

With vinyl,the important info is written in the deadwax,with CDs it's written near the hole.

Don't just rely on the info on the album cover as covers can be swapped,or the original cover is used for subsequent reissues.

Beechwoods
28-01-2010, 17:59
Replaygain stores these peak level values in a tag so that players that support it can 'normalise' them on the fly... it's slightly more complicated than this but you get the picture...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replay_Gain

webby
04-02-2010, 17:35
Another question; what is meant by the confidence rating given when using accurate rip?

Themis
04-02-2010, 20:31
Another question; what is meant by the confidence rating given when using accurate rip?
Confidence rating is based on the number of common answers.
A confidence rating of 12 means there are 12 other rips which had the same riping as yours.
Generally a confidence of 3 or more is enough, imho.

webby
05-02-2010, 11:16
How can I verify an accurate rip of a flac rip after it's been ripped? I don't have the disc anymore.

Themis
05-02-2010, 11:30
How can I verify an accurate rip of a flac rip after it's been ripped? I don't have the disc anymore.
You need to inflate to wav, then burn a CD, then rip it. ;)

Filterlab
19-02-2010, 19:54
Another vote for XLD.
Another vote for XLD. I also have Max on my system which I used a lot, but the Beechy put me on to XLD and I've never found anything better. The accuracy is staggering, and as Snapper says, importing using XLD and then burning to a CDR produces discs that are second to none.

The real boon to XLD is the way it uses the AccurateRip database - if your copy isn't great, someone else's sure is. :)