What do ya'll use to rip/encode cd's?

[Supermercado]

EAC and LAME via RazorLAME

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: daniel1113
If you use lame to create a VBR mp3, it will sound just as good as any ogg file.

No, sorry.

Yes, sorry

Unless he happens to be playing his music through a $50k audiophile setup, he will not hear a difference. Even then the difference would be awefully small, and probably not worth using ogg.

I love the layman's argument, hear it all the time from people who know nothing but think they do... "you're a mega-nerd audiophile" was a good one That same guy also claimed that headphone amps required car batteries and that good headphones were 500 GBP (~$1k US?) and up. Now you claim the setup required to hear the difference between mp3 and ogg is $50,000 :roll: Fact is, you can easily tell the difference with a $60 pair of ec2s or sr60s (overkill really, it's noticeable with less) and a $25 av710 card and get hooked on quality. You might even hear it on whatever setup you have, if you even bothered trying ogg.. but for what? You already know everything :disgust:

 

[BW86]

EAC + Lame for me.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: Gurck
I love the layman's argument, hear it all the time from people who know nothing but think they do... "you're a mega-nerd audiophile" was a good one That same guy also claimed that headphone amps required car batteries and that good headphones were 500 GBP (~$1k US?) and up. Now you claim the setup required to hear the difference between mp3 and ogg is $50,000 :roll: Fact is, you can easily tell the difference with a $60 pair of ec2s or sr60s (overkill really, it's noticeable with less) and a $25 av710 card and get hooked on quality. You might even hear it on whatever setup you have, if you even bothered trying ogg.. but for what? You already know everything :disgust:

That's why my music server box in my home office uses lossless FLAC and is connected to a Kenwood receiver with Polk RT28 bookshelf speakers.

Lossless beats every lossy codec. Ogg did outscore LAME MP3 at low bitrates last time HydrogenAudio.org had results from a double-blind test, but any lossy codec is going to have problems with some songs. With lossless (and lots of HD space) you can forget about that, and also transcode to any other format as needed without the quality drop from lossy-to-lossy transcoding.

Of course when I'm riding a noisy lifecycle, LAME -aps extreme MP3s are good enough.

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: BlueWeasel
Cdex + LAME for me.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: daniel1113
If you use lame to create a VBR mp3, it will sound just as good as any ogg file.

No, sorry.

Yes, sorry

Unless he happens to be playing his music through a $50k audiophile setup, he will not hear a difference. Even then the difference would be awefully small, and probably not worth using ogg.

I love the layman's argument, hear it all the time from people who know nothing but think they do... "you're a mega-nerd audiophile" was a good one That same guy also claimed that headphone amps required car batteries and that good headphones were 500 GBP (~$1k US?) and up. Now you claim the setup required to hear the difference between mp3 and ogg is $50,000 :roll: Fact is, you can easily tell the difference with a $60 pair of ec2s or sr60s (overkill really, it's noticeable with less) and a $25 av710 card and get hooked on quality. You might even hear it on whatever setup you have, if you even bothered trying ogg.. but for what? You already know everything :disgust:

Nice assumptions. The bottom line is that a properly encoded mp3 will sound identical to a properly encoded ogg. Period.

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: daniel1113
Nice assumptions. The bottom line is that a properly encoded mp3 will sound identical to a properly encoded ogg. Period.

Weather sucks here, how is it over there in Denial?

I'm well aware of the fact that you can't hear a difference on your setup - Audigys aren't musical cards, and while the Klipsch are great speakers for the money, that's just it - for the money. Audiophile speakers start at around a half grand, which is why many people choose headphones. Because you can't hear it doesn't mean nobody else can though, and your seat of the pants assumptions make you look like a fool.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: daniel1113
Nice assumptions. The bottom line is that a properly encoded mp3 will sound identical to a properly encoded ogg. Period.

Weather sucks here, how is it over there in Denial?

I'm well aware of the fact that you can't hear a difference on your setup - Audigys aren't musical cards, and while the Klipsch are great speakers for the money, that's just it - for the money. Audiophile speakers start at around a half grand, which is why many people choose headphones. Because you can't hear it doesn't mean nobody else can though, and your seat of the pants assumptions make you look like a fool.

What are you talking about? As I've said in many other posts, I don't use Klipsch or Audigy on my media PC, and they sure as hell aren't used in any of the recording studios I've been in. But, you can keep making all the assumptions that you want.

 

[Gurck]

Wasn't an assumption, it was what's in your sig Einstein. Oh, and another thing I wanted to ask you - if there's no difference between the two formats, why would they sound different on a $50,000 system, as you claimed earlier?

 

[BFG10K]

WMP10 ripping to lossless WMA.