dev builds
themes manual
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
dev guide

Rockbox mail archive

Subject: RE: EAC/Lame THE ANSWER !!!


From: Fred Maxwell <>
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 20:25:51 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On
> Behalf Of Jon Drukman
> Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2003 2:58 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: EAC/Lame THE ANSWER !!!
> At 11:06 AM 12/21/2003, Brian King wrote:
> >SteamShip wrote:
> >>I may be wrong, but it appears that you are more dedicated to Linux than
> >>you are to having high quality mp3's, so this discussion with you is
> >>misplaced. I started this topic to speak to audiophiles, not Linux-only
> >>computer users who happen to enjoy music as a sideline.
> >
> >Can someone explain to me how the choice of a DAE tool affects the
> >resulting audio quality? I had thought that the DAE tool simply ripped
> the
> >bits off the CD and onto your hard disk. Different DAE tools may be
> faster
> >than others, but I don't understand how SQ is affected.
> i think steamship is exaggerating the scope of the problem. with
> reasonably clean cd's and a decent modern cd-rom drive these issues are
> not
> common.

Steamship is not exaggerating the scope of the problem. With reasonably
clean CDs and a good modern drive, EAC still detects and corrects errors on
a high percentage of CDs. If there was no need for error detection and
correction, then EAC would not have a huge following and its author would
not have invested so many man-hours in its creation.

Jon asks 'why use it'? I have a better question: Why not use it? Why run
the risk that errors will creep into your rips? EAC is free and practically
guarantees error-free ripping. Why use anything else?

  Fred Maxwell
Received on 2003-12-22

Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy