EAC—new version does not work w/ old settings for LAME—what is needed?, Was: Exact Audio Copy Settings for mp3s (TOS #6) Options

[dead zone]

This forum was instrumental in helping me a while back setting up Exact Audio Copy to rip cds to wav/flac and mp3. But now I have a new computer with a new OS (Windows 7 instead of XP), a new version of Exact Audio Copy (now V1.0 beta 3) but unfortunately, getting EAC working again is sadly not as easy as just duplicating my previous settings. Good news is I have successfully set up EAC to rip my wav and flac files, but so far have not been able to rip 320 Constant Bit Rate mp3s.

Here are my settings in the Compression Options - External Compression page:

Use external program for compression - CHECKED
Parameter Passing Scheme - User Defined Encoder
File Extension - mp3
Program Path for compression is where I've installed LAME 3.99.3-64/lame.exe
Additional command-line options - (I've tried various options. I'm hoping this may be the issue. What should it be if I want 320 CBR mp3's?)
Bit Rate - 320 bit
-all the other options I've left unchecked.

I suspect I'm close to getting this working. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you!!

[greynol]

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=EAC_and_Lame

[db1989]

[I now have] a new version of Exact Audio Copy (now V1.0 beta 3) but unfortunately, getting EAC working again is sadly not as easy as just duplicating my previous settings.

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...AC_placeholders

[dead zone]

Thank you both for the links. They are both great sources of info. With my old versions of EAC/Lame I successfully used the additional command-line option: -b 320 %s %d to rip 320 CBR. But when I try applying the revised command-line info found in these links, I usually get the message "invalid replacement tag found" after making changes & hitting "ok". Alternately, I've tried varying the command-line and it will sometimes rip the track but won't compress to mp3 - usually I get the message "external compressor returned an error."

What am I doing wrong?

Is it mandatory for the lame.exe file to be within the EAC folder?

Is there a specific version of LAME that's only compatible with EAC v1.0 beta3?

Thanks!!

[db1989]

With my old versions of EAC/Lame I successfully used the additional command-line option: -b 320 %s %d to rip 320 CBR. But when I try applying the revised command-line info found in these links [. . .] What am I doing wrong?

It would certainly help to pinpoint the cause of your problems if you actually specified/confirmed the exact content of said new command-line. Is this it?

CODE

-b320 %source% %dest%

Is it mandatory for the lame.exe file to be within the EAC folder?

Is there a specific version of LAME that's only compatible with EAC v1.0 beta3?

In each case, no.

[dead zone]

It would certainly help to pinpoint the cause of your problems if you actually specified/confirmed the exact content of said new command-line. Is this it?

CODE

-b320 %source% %dest%

Thank you for the assistance! That's the command-line that would make sense to me. I just tried it and received "the external compressor returned an error Options: -h -b 320 -b320 %source% %dest% "0tmp660-!.wav" "0tmp660-!.mp3"

This post has been edited by db1989: Jan 20 2012, 00:53

Reason for edit: quote was not tagged as such

[db1989]

Then it appears that this . . .

Parameter Passing Scheme - User Defined Encoder

. . . is not the case.

The extra items in that error indicate that you have EAC set to use LAME, which is not generally recommended here. Try ensuring that the option is set to User Defined Encoder.


P.S. Note that -h is also not recommended and may actually decrease quality. This has been discussed before if you are interested.

[dead zone]

You were right, it wasn't set to User Defined Encoder. So I switched to that and tried again using the same command-line option (-b320 %source% %dest%) but got the error message "the external compressor returned an error Options: -b320 "1tmp556)!.wav/mp3

[mjb2006]

I'm unable to reproduce this problem. I'm using Win7 (64-bit), EAC 1.0b3, and the regular LAME 3.99.3 64-bit build from Rarewares.

Here's what I have in the External Compression tab:

[X] Use external program for compression
Parameter passing scheme: User Defined Encoder
Program, including path, used for compression: C:\Users\Foo\apps\lame-3.99.3-64\lame.exe
Additional command-line options: -b320 %source% %dest%
[X] Check for external programs return code

The other settings don't matter, because it's User Defined Encoder.

When I click on the Test encoder button (is this what you're doing?) it says:
Used commandline:
C:\Users\Foo\apps\lame-3.99.3-64\lame.exe -b320 "etmp9(-47.wav" "etmp9(-47.mp3"

Compressor output:

CODE

LAME 3.99.3 64bits (http://lame.sf.net)
CPU features: SSE (ASM used), SSE2 (ASM used)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 20094 Hz - 20627 Hz
Encoding etmp9(-47.wav to etmp9(-47.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (4.4x) 320 kbps qval=3
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
0/ ( 0%)| 0:00/ : | 0:00/ : | x| :
00:08--------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps % %
0/308 ( 0%)| 0:00/ 0:00| 0:00/ 0:00| 0.0000x| 0:00
00:08--------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps % %
100/308 (32%)| 0:00/ 0:00| 0:00/ 0:00| 42.824x| 0:00
-------------------------00:05-------------------------------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
200/308 (65%)| 0:00/ 0:00| 0:00/ 0:00| 43.178x| 0:00
-------------------------------------------------00:02-------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
300/308 (97%)| 0:00/ 0:00| 0:00/ 0:00| 43.059x| 0:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------00:00-
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
308/308 (100%)| 0:00/ 0:00| 0:00/ 0:00| 43.257x| 0:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
320.0 97.7 2.3 98.1 1.3 0.6
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -6.9dB

Return code: No error occurred
Average bitrate: 323
[X] Take over the average bitrate result to the compression options

I also confirmed that it worked when I do Alt+V and select a random WAV and a destination folder.
Are there any weird characters in the path to lame.exe?
Is it possible you have a bad build of LAME? Try with the one I linked to.

[dead zone]

I appreciate the time spent trying to help me out.

Actually, before I read this last post I did some more trial and error and rectified the problem by trying different versions of LAME. Lo and behold, one happened to work and I'm now happily able to rip mp3s again. Now just gotta work on fine tuning the ID tags.

So thanks again, you guys on Hydrogen Audio are great and you really know your stuff!!

[db1989]

Which version fixed the problem? This might help someone else encountering the same problem.

[szabi]

Hi

Same problem come up on my computer.

With this settings:


I got this:


Config:
Win7b64, eac-1.0beta3, lame.exe (v3.99.5)

I use this settings since several years, so i do not understand what is wrong now.
Any suggestion would be welcomed.
Thanks.

bye
szabi

[[JAZ]]

Didn't you even read this thread?? You can start by post number 2.

Edit: Do not skip the "Important Notice" in the wiki page.

This post has been edited by [JAZ]: Aug 5 2012, 10:11

[bbrabant]

I was also having a problem getting lame to work with EAC. In my case it solved it by adding this command to the lame command line --ignore-tag-errors. Some off my genre tags are not recognized by lame with this command Lame just writes the tag without checking.

[greynol]

That particular problem was fixed a long time ago.

What's more, that suggestion can't possibly help since the latest poster has told EAC to tag instead of lame.

[szabi]

I ripped to wav by eac and compressed to mp3 by foobar2000.
Foobar does not have problem to config lame correctly.

bye
szabi

[db1989]

Foobar does not have problem to config lame correctly.

Neither would EAC if you hadn’t configured it wrongly.

[greynol]

The answer to the latest question was already given in this thread and then reiterated in the first new reply.

This thread will now close.

bye
greynol