Hi everyone. After years of using EAC, I made the jump to foobar2000 a few months ago after reading this. I've been recommending the same to my friends ever since.
However unlike EAC where you can just google for EAC rip guide and get a jumpstart on the process, foobar2000 doesn't have any guide about ripping. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
So instead of emailing the few friends I have that are interested, I thought I'd make a guide for anyone who might find it useful HERE.
The target audience for this are people switching from Itunes and WMP, so I made it as easy as possible. I picked a full foobar installation so that they wouldn't have to look for the freedb option. Also I stuck with the default -V2 setting for LAME instead of advising they should ABX first before deciding on a -V setting.
Comments, feedback and even violent reactions are welcome.
Full Version: foobar2000 ripping guide
OMG, there is no point #10!
Even though it's for newbies, I would still write how to change the quality.
Even though it's for newbies, I would still write how to change the quality.
thanks for the feedback dude. i'll update that after dinner.
--just added an FAQ. although right now it just has 2 questions. (yay.) i didn't add it in the main page to keep the number of steps to a minimum and to keep newbies from getting an information overload.
i'll add to the faq as i get more feedback.
--just added an FAQ. although right now it just has 2 questions. (yay.) i didn't add it in the main page to keep the number of steps to a minimum and to keep newbies from getting an information overload.
i'll add to the faq as i get more feedback.
I don't know if this would make the guide more complicated, but you could add a step to show how to use CD/DVD drive offsets, this is done automatically in the latest EAC with AccurateRip, but the offset must be added manually in foobar2000.
Here's the list:
http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm
Here's the list:
http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm
Very nice. I may consider trying out foobar2000's secure ripping to see how it compares to EAC. Good job on the guide!
QUOTE(Rain @ Aug 19 2007, 10:41) 
I may consider trying out foobar2000's secure ripping to see how it compares to EAC.
It shouldn't make any difference if your discs are in good condition; and will make less of a difference if you have an accurate drive.
@skelly831, thanks for the tip. will add that tomorrow.
Secure ripping by foobar 2000 depends on the drive.
My LG GSA-4028B doessecure rips (compared with rips made by EAC) and refuses to rip a track if the cd is faulty.
However my USB GSA-2164D never refuses to rip any cd using foobar 2000. When I compare a slightly scratched cd's foobar 2000's wav file to the wav file ripped by EAC (GSA-2184 rip) with EAC's wave comparator, I get a "repeated samples" message.
I don't really know if this a cache size problem for foobar 2000.
To test this, take a really badly scratched cd and try to rip in foobar 2000 with secuıre mode. Open the foobar 2000 console and follow the messages. If you see repeated ripping tries or your ripping aborts with an error message, your drive is good for secure ripping with foobar 2000.
If you see no repeated tries than your drive doesn't do a secure rip with foobar 2000.
My LG GSA-4028B doessecure rips (compared with rips made by EAC) and refuses to rip a track if the cd is faulty.
However my USB GSA-2164D never refuses to rip any cd using foobar 2000. When I compare a slightly scratched cd's foobar 2000's wav file to the wav file ripped by EAC (GSA-2184 rip) with EAC's wave comparator, I get a "repeated samples" message.
I don't really know if this a cache size problem for foobar 2000.
To test this, take a really badly scratched cd and try to rip in foobar 2000 with secuıre mode. Open the foobar 2000 console and follow the messages. If you see repeated ripping tries or your ripping aborts with an error message, your drive is good for secure ripping with foobar 2000.
If you see no repeated tries than your drive doesn't do a secure rip with foobar 2000.
i just finished conducting a secure rip test with foobar2000 using my favorite scratched CD. I used these settings: drive speed - unlimited, security - standard, offset correction - 6. My drive is a LiteOn DVDRW LH-18A1P and i ripped to a single file image+cuesheet twice.
i got the same md5 for both rips: 235B1AA3E75476A6F5770B4FD338CAC0
this is a different drive from the ones i used in this thread, so EAC might be able to extract the cd on this drive without errors. i'll have to install and configure it first.
i got the same md5 for both rips: 235B1AA3E75476A6F5770B4FD338CAC0
this is a different drive from the ones i used in this thread, so EAC might be able to extract the cd on this drive without errors. i'll have to install and configure it first.
i just ripped the same cd with the latest version of EAC (only tracks 9 and 10 which couldn't be ripped previously) and it ripped just fine. here's the log:
so either my new drive is just really good or the newer version of EAC is better at error correction. the new config wizard is fool proof as well. i will need to look for a cd in worse condition to see which ripper is better. but in most cases, i don't think you can go wrong with either foobar2000 or EAC.
CODE
Exact Audio Copy V0.99 prebeta 3 from 28. July 2007
EAC extraction logfile from 20. August 2007, 19:11
Pearl Jam / Live on Two Legs
Used drive : LITE-ON DVDRW LH-18A1P Adapter: 0 ID: 0
Read mode : Secure
Utilize accurate stream : Yes
Defeat audio cache : Yes
Make use of C2 pointers : Yes
Read offset correction : 6
Overread into Lead-In and Lead-Out : No
Fill up missing offset samples with silence : Yes
Delete leading and trailing silent blocks : No
Null samples used in CRC calculations : No
Used interface : Native Win32 interface for Win NT & 2000
Gap handling : Not detected, thus appended to previous track
Used output format : Internal WAV Routines
Sample format : 44.100 Hz; 16 Bit; Stereo
TOC of the extracted CD
Track | Start | Length | Start sector | End sector
---------------------------------------------------------
1 | 0:00.00 | 5:05.52 | 0 | 22926
2 | 5:05.52 | 3:53.38 | 22927 | 40439
3 | 8:59.15 | 3:43.52 | 40440 | 57216
4 | 12:42.67 | 6:47.28 | 57217 | 87769
5 | 19:30.20 | 3:49.17 | 87770 | 104961
6 | 23:19.37 | 2:02.50 | 104962 | 114161
7 | 25:22.12 | 2:28.13 | 114162 | 125274
8 | 27:50.25 | 2:41.32 | 125275 | 137381
9 | 30:31.57 | 4:02.53 | 137382 | 155584
10 | 34:34.35 | 5:17.12 | 155585 | 179371
11 | 39:51.47 | 5:42.73 | 179372 | 205094
12 | 45:34.45 | 4:38.45 | 205095 | 225989
13 | 50:13.15 | 3:45.35 | 225990 | 242899
14 | 53:58.50 | 4:06.07 | 242900 | 261356
15 | 58:04.57 | 6:55.48 | 261357 | 292529
16 | 65:00.30 | 6:17.32 | 292530 | 320836
Track 9
Filename C:\Documents and Settings\public\Desktop\Pearl Jam - Live on Two Legs\Pearl Jam - 09 - Red Mosquito.wav
Peak level 98.8 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Copy CRC 2734B6BC
Accurately ripped (confidence 4) [F602CAA6]
Copy OK
Track 10
Filename C:\Documents and Settings\public\Desktop\Pearl Jam - Live on Two Legs\Pearl Jam - 10 - Even Flow.wav
Peak level 97.7 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Copy CRC B7985DA4
Accurately ripped (confidence 4) [272EEE68]
Copy OK
All tracks accurately ripped
No errors occurred
End of status report
EAC extraction logfile from 20. August 2007, 19:11
Pearl Jam / Live on Two Legs
Used drive : LITE-ON DVDRW LH-18A1P Adapter: 0 ID: 0
Read mode : Secure
Utilize accurate stream : Yes
Defeat audio cache : Yes
Make use of C2 pointers : Yes
Read offset correction : 6
Overread into Lead-In and Lead-Out : No
Fill up missing offset samples with silence : Yes
Delete leading and trailing silent blocks : No
Null samples used in CRC calculations : No
Used interface : Native Win32 interface for Win NT & 2000
Gap handling : Not detected, thus appended to previous track
Used output format : Internal WAV Routines
Sample format : 44.100 Hz; 16 Bit; Stereo
TOC of the extracted CD
Track | Start | Length | Start sector | End sector
---------------------------------------------------------
1 | 0:00.00 | 5:05.52 | 0 | 22926
2 | 5:05.52 | 3:53.38 | 22927 | 40439
3 | 8:59.15 | 3:43.52 | 40440 | 57216
4 | 12:42.67 | 6:47.28 | 57217 | 87769
5 | 19:30.20 | 3:49.17 | 87770 | 104961
6 | 23:19.37 | 2:02.50 | 104962 | 114161
7 | 25:22.12 | 2:28.13 | 114162 | 125274
8 | 27:50.25 | 2:41.32 | 125275 | 137381
9 | 30:31.57 | 4:02.53 | 137382 | 155584
10 | 34:34.35 | 5:17.12 | 155585 | 179371
11 | 39:51.47 | 5:42.73 | 179372 | 205094
12 | 45:34.45 | 4:38.45 | 205095 | 225989
13 | 50:13.15 | 3:45.35 | 225990 | 242899
14 | 53:58.50 | 4:06.07 | 242900 | 261356
15 | 58:04.57 | 6:55.48 | 261357 | 292529
16 | 65:00.30 | 6:17.32 | 292530 | 320836
Track 9
Filename C:\Documents and Settings\public\Desktop\Pearl Jam - Live on Two Legs\Pearl Jam - 09 - Red Mosquito.wav
Peak level 98.8 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Copy CRC 2734B6BC
Accurately ripped (confidence 4) [F602CAA6]
Copy OK
Track 10
Filename C:\Documents and Settings\public\Desktop\Pearl Jam - Live on Two Legs\Pearl Jam - 10 - Even Flow.wav
Peak level 97.7 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Copy CRC B7985DA4
Accurately ripped (confidence 4) [272EEE68]
Copy OK
All tracks accurately ripped
No errors occurred
End of status report
so either my new drive is just really good or the newer version of EAC is better at error correction. the new config wizard is fool proof as well. i will need to look for a cd in worse condition to see which ripper is better. but in most cases, i don't think you can go wrong with either foobar2000 or EAC.
The new version of EAC is not any more accurate than the previous version of EAC. No changes were made to the portion of the code that is responsible for secure ripping. Neither EAC nor any other DAE software (including foobar2000) performs error correction, btw.
In order to determine which ripper is better, you'll have to test a lot more than just one disc and one drive. Furthermore you cannot simply rely on the being able to get the same result multiple times in order to conclude that the rip was good with EAC or foobar2000, though you can rely on AccurateRip results.
PS: You might want to use "codebox" instead of "quote" when showing EAC logs.
In order to determine which ripper is better, you'll have to test a lot more than just one disc and one drive. Furthermore you cannot simply rely on the being able to get the same result multiple times in order to conclude that the rip was good with EAC or foobar2000, though you can rely on AccurateRip results.
PS: You might want to use "codebox" instead of "quote" when showing EAC logs.
@greynol
i was under the impression that getting the same result multiple times is enough to conclude that a rip was good. is that not the same principle as ripping to get matching CRCs in test and copy mode in EAC? that's what Andre Wiethoff recommends here.
i was under the impression that getting the same result multiple times is enough to conclude that a rip was good. is that not the same principle as ripping to get matching CRCs in test and copy mode in EAC? that's what Andre Wiethoff recommends here.
QUOTE(twostar @ Aug 21 2007, 09:13)
i was under the impression that getting the same result multiple times is enough to conclude that a rip was good. is that not the same principle as ripping to get matching CRCs in test and copy mode in EAC?
Yes, and it is the principle behind EAC's secure mode and many other ripping programs as well; however, the assumption on which it is based is simply untrue. Errors do not always result in random data. I believe Spath will go even further and say errors never result in random data. He has good reason to know since he develops firmware for optical drives.Anyhow, I've already presented data to this forum on more than one occasion demonstrating recurring CRCs for rips that are not accurate.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.