IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
X-Fi super ripping, creative labs ripping method
Donunus
post Aug 28 2005, 05:11
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 8-July 05
Member No.: 23210



Is this better than lame preset extreme or insane? is this just hype or is the x fi really an awesome ripping method?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Defsac
post Aug 28 2005, 05:48
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 347
Joined: 17-May 05
Member No.: 22107



LAME is an encoder, not a ripper. If the X-Fi incorporates ripping I don't imagine it would be any better than EAC.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
atici
post Aug 28 2005, 06:15
Post #3





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1180
Joined: 21-February 02
From: Chicago
Member No.: 1367



QUOTE (Donunus @ Aug 27 2005, 11:11 PM)
Is this better than lame preset extreme or insane? is this just hype or is the x fi really an awesome ripping method?
*

How does a sound card do ripping? blink.gif And what does LAME got to do with it? Beats me...

Have a look at the comparison table. At the moment X-Fi does not do ripping, and does everything else just on the "excellent" scale -- not "awesome". Maybe the future models will serve your needs.

This post has been edited by atici: Aug 28 2005, 06:50


--------------------
The object of mankind lies in its highest individuals.
One must have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
edekba
post Aug 28 2005, 06:22
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 191
Joined: 6-February 02
From: 310
Member No.: 1273



Xi-Fi is suppose to rip CDAudio using WMA at 24bits or something. The Xfi is suppsoe to have a SRC to upcovert audio signals.

"The Creative X-Fi Xtreme Fidelity audio processor puts your music and movie audio through a two-step quality enhancement process. First it converts the audio into 24-bit/96kHz quality, then it remasters and selectively enhances the audio by analyzing and identifying which parts of the audio stream have been restricted/damaged during the compression stages to 16-bit and then to MP3. The result is music that sounds cleaner, smoother and has more sparkle, and movies that sound more realistic than ever before!"

"Sound Blaster X-Fi uses the X-Fi 24-bit Crystalizer & X-Fi CMSS-3D features to "SuperRip" CD's into Xtreme Fidelity quality. You can now enjoy permanently enhanced music instead of low-quality MP3 files!"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
atici
post Aug 28 2005, 06:38
Post #5





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1180
Joined: 21-February 02
From: Chicago
Member No.: 1367



QUOTE (edekba @ Aug 28 2005, 12:22 AM)
... then it remasters and selectively enhances the audio by analyzing and identifying which parts of the audio stream have been restricted/damaged during the compression stages to 16-bit and then to MP3.

"Sound Blaster X-Fi uses the X-Fi 24-bit Crystalizer & X-Fi CMSS-3D features to "SuperRip" CD's into Xtreme Fidelity quality. You can now enjoy permanently enhanced music instead of low-quality MP3 files!"
*

I thought what X-Fi does is actually compression : see the image at this post. And it is so far mentioned (to my knowledge) that it is only designed to recover the loss occurred during encoding into MP3 not during the mastering the original CD. Otherwise this makes even less sense than the earlier claims of Creative: Rip a CD into 24 bit and then encode into MP3 ? Wouldn't that increase the file size?

Soon the artists wouldn't even have to make music. Because Creative Z-Fi would collect the music information from their old albums and enhance it into an entirely new album that would sound better than all the conventionally made albums in a studio. laugh.gif


--------------------
The object of mankind lies in its highest individuals.
One must have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
edekba
post Aug 28 2005, 06:44
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 191
Joined: 6-February 02
From: 310
Member No.: 1273



QUOTE (atici @ Aug 27 2005, 09:38 PM)
Soon the artists wouldn't even have to make music. Because Creative Z-Fi would collect the music information from their old albums and enhance it into an entirely new album that would sound better than all the conventionally made albums in a studio. laugh.gif
*



haha ... yeah that sounds like Creative's master plan lol.

Anyway, i've been in the market for the X-Fi and was doing some reviews and stuff about it, how it has like 10x the transitor count compared to an audigy2 etc.

The X-Fi Super Resample Thingy ... "24-bit Crystalize" basically converts ur 16bit audio into 24bit audio and then Creative's "Crystalize" thing boosts high/low signals. Sounds like an over hyped EQ to me ... & u're basically allowing Creative to set its own poitns on that EQ. Most review sites said that this feature was mediocre at best, another marketing blitz from Creativ.e
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dreamliner77
post Aug 28 2005, 06:48
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 2150
Joined: 29-June 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 2427



Heh, funny, I never knew what I was missing with properly mastered cd's. Maybe someone should tell Steve Hoffman about this. It'll make his job so much easier...


--------------------
"You can fight without ever winning, but never win without a fight." Neil Peart 'Resist'
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Defsac
post Aug 28 2005, 07:44
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 347
Joined: 17-May 05
Member No.: 22107



QUOTE (atici @ Aug 28 2005, 03:15 PM)
How does a sound card do ripping?
Bundled software.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kjoonlee
post Aug 28 2005, 08:40
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 2526
Joined: 25-July 02
From: South Korea
Member No.: 2782



Judging from edekba's first post, I'd say it isn't very awsome at all.

This post has been edited by kjoonlee: Aug 28 2005, 08:41


--------------------
http://blacksun.ivyro.net/vorbis/vorbisfaq.htm
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Donunus
post Aug 28 2005, 10:26
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 8-July 05
Member No.: 23210



Ok so is it safe to say this wont set standards? mp3 compatibility with better than wav sound? sounded like bull to me but with the upsampling,... who knows?
Has anybody xactually done a rip/encode with this software?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
edekba
post Aug 28 2005, 11:15
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 191
Joined: 6-February 02
From: 310
Member No.: 1273



QUOTE (Donunus @ Aug 28 2005, 01:26 AM)
Ok so is it safe to say this wont set standards? mp3 compatibility with better than wav sound? sounded like bull to me but with the upsampling,... who knows?
Has anybody xactually done a rip/encode with this software?
*


not mp3 ... wma.

Personally i think that SuperRip is like a wma file ... that X=Fi "upsamples" for "better quality sound"


... CD sounds GREAT to me ... no need to upsample after they'be been mastered by the experts and what not but that just me.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bug80
post Aug 28 2005, 11:30
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 397
Joined: 23-January 05
From: The Netherlands
Member No.: 19254



QUOTE (Donunus @ Aug 28 2005, 11:26 AM)
Ok so is it safe to say this wont set standards? mp3 compatibility with better than wav sound? sounded like bull to me but with the upsampling,... who knows?
Has anybody xactually done a rip/encode with this software?
*

Remember: upsampling has nothing to do with improving sound quality.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gecko
post Aug 28 2005, 11:38
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 934
Joined: 15-December 01
From: Germany
Member No.: 662



Um, wouldn't that mean your sound will be mangled with twice? Once upon ripping and compression and once again when playing back? I can see the benefit of postprocessing before encoding, but how would Winamp know?

Ah, I hear you say, you need to use the Creative player! How convenient! But then again, "remastering" something twice should make it sound twice as good. Would be a shame if those millions of transistors would twiddle their thumbs, eating idle power, when I'm doing such a mundane thing such as listening to music.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
skelly831
post Aug 29 2005, 02:58
Post #14





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 782
Joined: 11-April 05
From: México
Member No.: 21361



Creative sucks, period.

Not only does their marketing dept. think everybody is a noob at this stuff, but their more recent products have been of lower quality than before, and their customer service convinces people otherwise, my muvo N200 player is not the best, in fact it's downright mediocre, it skips randomly during mp3, wav and wma playback, but i stuck with it because they said on their board that a firmware update would fix it. It didn't.

I've seen people give up an M-Audio Audiophile 2496 for an X-Fi... that's sad.


--------------------
we was young an' full of beans
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dreamliner77
post Aug 29 2005, 06:54
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 2150
Joined: 29-June 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 2427



I'll take any 2496's that are given up!

This post has been edited by dreamliner77: Aug 29 2005, 06:55


--------------------
"You can fight without ever winning, but never win without a fight." Neil Peart 'Resist'
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lyx
post Aug 29 2005, 07:30
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 3353
Joined: 6-July 03
From: Sachsen (DE)
Member No.: 7609



Why does creative get so much airtime on ha.org for basically cheating people just one more time? Aren't there enough other soundcard manufacturers out there who may deserve attention for doing something actually useful? If creative labs would be a user and would post this crap on ha.org, then it would already have been banned multiple times, so why do idiots get more airtime than trustworthy manufacturers?

- Lyx


--------------------
I am arrogant and I can afford it because I deliver.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
odyssey
post Oct 29 2005, 15:03
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 2296
Joined: 18-May 03
From: Denmark
Member No.: 6695



X-Fi does not EQ or even need it's own player.

Their crystalliser are creating a new sound environment to "improve" (fake) a better sound. This may sound fairly good on some (mostly older) music, but after a while, the "improved" music sounds even more distorted than improved.

That is - X-fi does practically nothing you can't do yourself in Audition! It does not even save 24bit files, as everything is converted 16bit->24bit->16bit!

I hope this clears up the confusion

(How come so many people scream about things they practically don't know shit about? Just google around for a few minutes, and a lot of confusion could be avoided in a thread like this!!!)

I did not just read some reviews - I own an x-fi myself, and I must agree that i'm not really THAT impressed!!

Conclusion: X-fi is pure hype, and cannot in any way be compared to encoding presets.

This just came to my mind: If your X-fi is setup to crystallise all output, then crystallised files would be crystallised twice when listening. Now Crystallisation can be set at a specific level, but this is definately lame!

This post has been edited by odyssey: Oct 29 2005, 15:07


--------------------
Can't wait for a HD-AAC encoder :P
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th April 2014 - 01:11