It seems that compression to FLAC (amongst audiophiles and technocrats) boils down to an impassioned debate between the voiciferous members of two camps: Camp EAC and Camp dBpoweramp. I do not have the skills to look at the source code and see which is superior along any dimension. That said I simply ask that folks experienced using both utilities tell me their simple, binary, A:B opinion.

Which sounds more like the original CD?

-Mark

Oh boy. "Which sounds more like the original CD?" is a can of worms you don't want to open without being very careful.

Digitally copying the data is digitally copying the data; short of things like pregap handling and error correction, audio CDs don't "sound" different when ripped by different programs unless they do something unorthodox to the data.

A securely ripped FLAC file from either source (dbpoweramp or EAC) will sound exactly like the original CD if played back through the same audio chain. Lossless is lossless! I think if you search this forum you'll find that the dbpoweramp and EAC camps don't really argue much that one is better than the other. My interpretation of reading lots of posts on this is that either program is the "gold standard" for ripping. They differ slightly in user interface. I've used both, and currently use dbpoweramp, which I like quite a bit. But again, if the FLAC file is ripped securely from the CD it is lossless.

Please do some research before conducting polls.