From: Fred Maxwell <rockbox_at_anti-spam.org>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 14:47:59 -0400

Binder, David wrote:

> I ONLY use MM for ripping my CDs. I tried a lot of others, including
> Cdex w/LAME, and, though the quality from CDEx was good, I didn't find
> it that much better than MM. The main I reason I use MM is because it is
> FAST!!

MM has no error detection and correction, which is one reason why it is
so fast. If it gets errors reading the CD, the errors make it into the
music, where they may or may not be audible, depending on the severity
and number of errors encountered.

> On average, on my Pentium III 550 PC, it takes about 1 and a half
> minutes to rip a 3 minute song into a 128 mp3 file. That same song and
> same bit rate using MM takes about 15 seconds!!! And, like I said, the
> sound quality from MM is very, very good.

There is no such thing as "very, very good" sound quality with a 128kbps
MP3. That's like saying that your stock Hyundai Access is very, very fast.

Your assessment is based on the flawed assumption that listening to rips
from CDs A, B, and C will allow you to predict how rips vrom CDs X, Y,
and Z will sound. If X, Y, or Z has uncorrected errors, there may be
significantly degraded sound.

Regards,
   Fred Maxwell

_______________________________________________
http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox
Received on 2004-05-14