POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

Post a reply

Smilies
:D :) :( :o :-? 8) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :roll: :wink:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by Aff » Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:05 pm

Great! I'm looking forward to 4.0.

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by nohitter151 » Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:43 pm

Aff wrote:Currently there is no support for AccurateRip with the new ripping engine, which will keep me away from using it, as I can't be sure that a rip is error-free, especially if a CD makes difficulties with reading.
Would be great if AccurateRip were be possible.
It will be in Mediamonkey 4.0.

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by Aff » Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:39 pm

Currently there is no support for AccurateRip with the new ripping engine, which will keep me away from using it, as I can't be sure that a rip is error-free, especially if a CD makes difficulties with reading.
Would be great if AccurateRip were be possible.

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by Just JP » Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:39 pm

Using the external tools script it's almost like having EAC built into MM now. To have it an official part of MM will be even better.

Jim

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by Eyal » Mon Oct 19, 2009 4:16 pm

nohitter151 wrote:@All: This feature is already planned for MM 4.0, which will follow the release of 3.1.2.
Wow! :o :D

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by nohitter151 » Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:31 pm

@All: This feature is already planned for MM 4.0, which will follow the release of 3.1.2.

For this feature's specifics, see:
http://www.ventismedia.com/mantis/view.php?id=243
It will also utilize AccurateRip: http://www.ventismedia.com/mantis/view.php?id=3165

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by lindholm » Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:06 pm

I would really like to see MM licensing the EAC code, rather than trying to re-invent the wheel.

I use EAC for all my ripping and it would make my life a lot simpler if I could use MM knowing that
it will give the EAC quality.

George

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by ehart » Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:45 pm

I haven't been able to get EAC running on my machine. I'm sure it's possible, but it's a confusing, powerful piece of hacker-ware in my opinion, way beyond what most of normal users like me want to think about. For that reason, I think implementing a small subset of EAC functionality in MM is very worthwhile.

The simplest answer would be to offer two checkboxes in MM. One that just reports/logs errors (including the track and time offset of the error), with a further option to continue or stop on errors. That way the person would know they need to listen to a bad track and decide what is needed (the error log could even give a click box to listen to 10 seconds before and after the error - simple). Maybe nothing is needed - most errors aren't audible. If they later want to run EAC to try to recover the CD, go for it. But the first task in MM is just to let the user know that the copy wasn't perfect.

To go a step further, MM could also implement a checkbox that turns on "secure" ripping. This would implement an EAC-like functionality using common defaults. If people want lots of settings and tweaking, let them use EAC. If a CD can't be ripped error-free - eject it with a message, and again, let the user try EAC if they so desire.

So my thought is -- let the user know if there are errors, and even possibly implement basic "secure ripping" functionality. This prevents a user from wasting hundreds of hours ripping CDs that later turn out to have errors. For advanced functionality, let the user use EAC.

Cordially,

Eric Hart

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by DazB » Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:17 am

Hi,

If you are bumping it for an answer that should really be in it's own thread...

I assume you are using the Virtual CD feature - someone else would have to comment (I don't believe it would be difficult) as I had my fingers burnt (naïvety?). I don't rip using MM can hide the associated CD tracks using filters. As any application I use can read from my local CDDB structure they are guaranteed to get the same results. MM stores the XMCD DISCID for the CD and I have it in the ripped files, but due to the limitations of the FreeDB implementation, I would link the albums or tracks via the AccurateRip, MusicBrainz and/or MusicIP identifiers.

Daz

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by tbessie » Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:46 am

*bump*

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by tbessie » Sun Dec 28, 2008 9:18 pm

DazB wrote:Hi,

@tbessie: Yes, it could be scripted, but imagine being able to choose which "component" rips the files...and using a batch ripper would make more sense.

Daz
Daz...

Which aspect could be scripted? Whatever ripping method I use, if you're talking about scripting the matching up of CD checksum to tracks in my MM library, I'd still have to have MM GET the checksum from the CD in the first place (or get it from some stored location associated with the tracks/album).

In any of the above cases, it would have to be a custom solution; I don't want to have to write it myself. The MM bug caused the problem, and I'd like an MM feature to make recovering from it very easy. If that takes someone else (not me) writing a wonderous script to do this, and it being incorporated into part of MM, so be it, but I think the MM Devs should add such functionality to MM in some way, to make up for their earlier mistake.

My 2 cents. :-)

- tim

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by DazB » Sun Dec 28, 2008 7:17 pm

Hi,

@tbessie: Yes, it could be scripted, but imagine being able to choose which "component" rips the files...and using a batch ripper would make more sense.

Daz

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by tbessie » Sun Dec 28, 2008 2:30 pm

DazB wrote:Hi,

@ummu:
  1. Adding some features from EAC might seem logical and add sales appeal, but the dedicated tools are always going to be better.
  2. MM is going to finish up being a "Jack of all trades" and therefore master of none. Ventis don't have a big development team and the lifetime licensing will be their undoing. There are already many features that don't work properly, add more and the interrelationships become more complex, making bugs harder to fix.
I would agree, except for one thing... and it's an important one. Since ripping my entire library to FLAC, and then the FLAC bug that MM had destroying the integrity of these files (they are still playable, but are not accurate copies of the CDs, having had several chunks of their first 1-20 samples destroyed by the bug), I have to RERIP MY ENTIRE COLLECTION, and match up every one of these CDs with my MM library.

We may have a tool to do this in that plugin that lets you copy over library tags to a set of existing tracks... but TRY DOING THIS WITH 7000-10000 TRACKS. Extremely tedious, error-prone, etc.

If MM is my ripper as well as my library manager, the CD checksum used to match up a CD with it's track listing is the same program, and this assignment of track tags happens automatically instead of me having to do each CD by hand and eye.

- Tim

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by MusicBringer » Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:36 pm

Eyal wrote:
DazB wrote:I would prefer the MM team to spend its time making MM the best library manager and tagger out there. Matching the abilities of dBpoweramp & EAC would be a major undertaking and as the cost of one is negligible and the other is free I think it would be madness.
True.
Me Too. I agree with this. I would prefer the MM team to spend its time making MM the best library manager.

Re: POLL: More Powerful Ripping? (like EAC)

by rovingcowboy » Sun Dec 28, 2008 6:14 am

i like the componet systems in stereos for the same thing DazB if one unit and something breaks i lose use of the stereo until that one thing is fixed. if on the other hand the turntable or the tape deck break i only lose use of it not the whole system.

which is just so happens that right now i'm with out a turntable. but i can still here the radio which is how i use my mediamonkey jukebox so i am happy. but if that was an all in one unit i'd be one mad mediamonkey user then. :(

Top