Go Back   Hardware Canucks > SOFTWARE > O/S's, Drivers & General Software

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old November 25, 2008, 07:03 PM
muse108dc's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver North
Posts: 1,666
Default Looking for a FLAC ripper and converter.

I have some CDs which I want to rip in lossless but cant find any good software, any suggestions?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old November 25, 2008, 07:17 PM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muse108dc View Post
I have some CDs which I want to rip in lossless but cant find any good software, any suggestions?
Lossless is a waste of space, just rip them to mp3.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old November 25, 2008, 07:28 PM
joeperson's Avatar
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Default

preferably ogg :P

foobar2000 with the proper codecs
__________________
Q6600 3.0GHZ (9x333) stockV | ATI 5850 | OCZ Platinum 4GB PC2-6400 DDR2 5.4.4.15 1.9V | Silverstone Raven RV01 | Gigabyte EP45-DS3R
Corsair Professional HX750W | Windows 7 | Crossbow mounted Xigmatek HDT-S1283 | LG W2242TQ-BF 22" | Samsung 2253BW 22"
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old November 25, 2008, 07:41 PM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,585
Default

ogg is just as useless.

And I should fix my statement, lossless isn't useless, just most people don't have the equipment to notice the difference between a mp3 and a flac file.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old November 26, 2008, 06:13 AM
Nodscene's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 951
Default

Well, I partially agree with enaberif. Ogg was created to give better audio quality for the lower end of the bitrate spectrum and isn't as good of a codec a LAME. Flac doesn't need killer equipment to be able to notice the difference from mp3's. It really depends on the person. The nice thing about flac though is that you can archive your music and from there be able to make mp3's out of them or even ogg if that is what you want.

Either way you can get it at FLAC - download

After you download the codec then you can get a program to rip them if you scroll further down the page. I've used the Flac frontend and multi-frontend with great success.
__________________

Create something idiot proof and they will make a better idiot.
_____________________________________

Intel Q6600 - Gigabyte EP35-DS4 - OCZ Reaper 4gig PC2-6400 - XFX 8800GT 512Mb Alpha Dog - AuzenTech X-Fi Prelude - Alesis M1Active MK2 - Corsair HX-620 - Silverstone Temjin TJ05B-X - Scythe Katana 2 - WD Raptor 150Gb - Seagate 7200.11 750Gb x2 - Samsung SH-S203N
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old November 26, 2008, 08:20 AM
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,628
Default

what he ^^ said.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old November 26, 2008, 01:01 PM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodscene View Post
Well, I partially agree with enaberif. Ogg was created to give better audio quality for the lower end of the bitrate spectrum and isn't as good of a codec a LAME. Flac doesn't need killer equipment to be able to notice the difference from mp3's. It really depends on the person. The nice thing about flac though is that you can archive your music and from there be able to make mp3's out of them or even ogg if that is what you want.

Either way you can get it at FLAC - download

After you download the codec then you can get a program to rip them if you scroll further down the page. I've used the Flac frontend and multi-frontend with great success.
OGG is a non-standard format so if you ever wanted to put it onto a portable media player a lot of them don't recognize it; so again mp3 is better.

FLAC again is a waste of space as I'm talking 600-700mb of space compared to 60-70mb of space and 90% of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a lossless format and a mp3 due to audio equipment not being up to standards.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old November 26, 2008, 01:49 PM
Spaceman-Spiff's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: burnaby.bc.ca
Posts: 355
Default

I'm assuming muse108dc is one of the 10%, so: The BonkEnc Project - BonkEnc Home

There are many other FLAC CD Ripper programs, but most aren't free.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old November 26, 2008, 01:54 PM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spaceman-Spiff View Post
I'm assuming muse108dc is one of the 10%, so: The BonkEnc Project - BonkEnc Home

There are many other FLAC CD Ripper programs, but most aren't free.
Since we haven't heard from muse I'm going to assume he heard about lossless but doesn't know the real details about it.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old November 26, 2008, 03:00 PM
Nodscene's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 951
Default

I've yet to see an album require 600-700 mb of space when using Flac. If that's the case then you aren't using any compression at all and should check your settings. Normally it's in and around 300 to 400 megs tops for a typical album.
__________________

Create something idiot proof and they will make a better idiot.
_____________________________________

Intel Q6600 - Gigabyte EP35-DS4 - OCZ Reaper 4gig PC2-6400 - XFX 8800GT 512Mb Alpha Dog - AuzenTech X-Fi Prelude - Alesis M1Active MK2 - Corsair HX-620 - Silverstone Temjin TJ05B-X - Scythe Katana 2 - WD Raptor 150Gb - Seagate 7200.11 750Gb x2 - Samsung SH-S203N
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes