Boy, I love flying by the seat of my pants!

Ok, as you can see from the topic, I just installed EAC & LAME.

I want to get my feet wet with ripping to hear how exact this process can be. I read the first page of this post http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....T&f=15&t=203&s= but I really don't know what my EAC (and if necessary, LAME) program settings should be.

After the EAC installation, these became my default Compression settings:

-use external program for compression (checked)
-parameter passing scheme: user defined encoder
-use file extension: .mp3
-program use for compression (points to my LAME directory)
-additional command line options: %l--alt-preset 128%l%h--alt-preset standard%h %s %d
-bit rate: 192 kBits/s
-delete WAV after compression
-add ID3 tag
-high quality

BTW, I chose "beginner mode" upon EAC installation.

Any direction anyone can point me in to know if these are decent settings for high quality? What else should I be concerned with in using these two apps for ripping purposes?

Thanks...

All your answers can be found HERE


Just two things:
1.- There is NO POINT in selecting "User defined parameter". EAC has built-in LAME suppport. And no matter what anyone tells you, it has been settled already that it passes no additional arguments to the command line (which should be --alt preset standard for BEST quality).
2.- There is NO POINT in selecting 192k when your command line tells LAME to ABR around 128k. It would make no difference.

Check the supplied link and use extesively, please.

Thank you very much Ataque!!!

Well, depending on whether EAC precisely supports the switches of the codec release you happen to be using (rarely happens), and whether how EAC passes parameters is well documented (never happens) - I've found it very useful to use the user defined encoder features.

Also, if you're creating tunes for a portable you may well want to control it a bit more than alt preset standard (aps). aps tends to create files around 190-200kbps.

I haven't checked what's changed with the new release of EAC, but this wheel was probably mostly invented already, see:

http://www.ping.be/satcp/eac02.htm#- for a discussion of the logic behind various settings, and http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articles/auto/10012002d regarding EAC and LAME

maybe you wants to try the List of recommended LAME compiles with --alt-preset standard, this compile add the -Z swith by default.

These links are very valuable and I've started reading them already. Thanks...

Buzzy - I don't anticipate creating any MP3s for a portable any time soon.

As u can see in LAME Recommended compiles, version 3.90.3 is
the one u should use, not 3.93.1.

Some time ago I read this post Does EAC add aguments to --alt-preset standard, and the conclusion was:

I would recommend 3.90.2 with the -Z switch cos EAC doesn't log the encoder version used & encspot will claim 3.90 so there is no proof of if --alt-preset with -Z was used or not . Even better use 3.91 .


edit: For the last time, LAME switches are case-sensitive... -z -> -Z

I beg to differ. Regardless of what may or may not have been "settled already", there is a strong argument for User Defined Encoder parameter passing with commandline usage. It is based on safety and simple logic:

1) if (repeat, IF) there is any doubt at all about additions to the command line, it lies with the Lame MP3 Encoder parameter passing scheme, and not with User Defined Encoder -- i.e. nobody has ever claimed that User Defined Encoder adds any unwanted or unspecified items to the command line

2) User Defined Encoder is at least as easy to set up as Lame MP3 Encoder

3) Andre has always recommended UDE over LME for commandline usage, regardless of the fact that he may or may not not know everything there is to know about the innards of LAME

4) simple logic, IMHO, dictates that a user-defined commandline warrants user-defined parameter passing as well

These points are enough, for me at least, to make the choice of User Defined Encoder over Lame MP3 Encoder a very easy one.

Regards,
Madrigal

Not true. If you use ABR (--alt-preset <bitrate>), the bitrate selected from the drop-down list will be mapped to the minimum bitrate (the parameter passed must be -b <bitrate>). That's why I would always use the "User Defined Encoder", to be absolutely certain.

I stopped reading that huge thread on this topic (the one that upNorth linked) at the point when the results posted became absolutely unreadable, but I can't really believe nobody found out about this during that extensive test.

just forget about the -Z switch. use 3.90.3. using 3.90.2 doesn't prove anything either, but -maybe- the --alt-presets may have been broken.

EDIT: using -Z or not shouldn't be a criterium to reencode your whole music. -Z was introduced coz of some problem samples.

The suggested thread and my comment are about -aps.
There might be, as you suggest, problems with other settings
I would not know since I only use aps

The suggested compile is now 3.90.3
You are right, Z will only make some samples better but anyway, Dibrom said that the purpose of alt preset standard is to make it the best setting available using current MP3 technology. Suggesting a "modification" to such line would be kinda incongruent and confusing. So another compile, which just hardwired Z (proved to improve some problematic samples) was necesary.

There is still some people who use 3.90.2 with manually added Z just because they think that it is more "accurate". Do not, please, 3.90.3 is the recommended compile (oficially), now.

Here is the exact quote:

If someone has a album I want enocded in APS -z, someone in APS I would take the -z, so yes it does make a small diffrence to know if -z is used or if -z is not used I would use -z you would not use -z not really important if -z is used or -z is not used.

westgroveg, please write this 100 times: "LAME switches are case-sensitive."

looks like citay being some sysiphos.

@westgroved: the difference will be noticeable in very few samples. there should be no need to reencode. and therefore it' not really important if encspot can tell if -Z is used or not.

but let's now recommend 3.90.3 --alt-preset standard all happily together. coz it's the greatest thing mp3 can do (up to now).