Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
Direct conversion of audio files on CD
- Head_on_a_Stick
- Posts: 14114
- Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
- Location: London, England
- Has thanked: 81 times
- Been thanked: 133 times
Re: Direct conversion of audio files on CD
^ Well please tell me which language you're using for your semi-comprehensible wall-of-text posts and I'll work on it
deadbang
Re: Direct conversion of audio files on CD
Although, to be fair. It is also probably true that many people cannot hear the difference in a double blind trial. Those that can do this, will be able to do it only when the conditions and equipment are perfect.
ref:
https://cdvsmp3.wordpress.com/cd-vs-itu ... t-results/
EDIT: although in the experiment above, they use a better codec than mp3 (AAC 256k VBR)
Also, the results are in a way inconclusive (my opinion), as it appears that some of the participants passed multiple times, while most failed. This could be explained by fact that most people don't know where to look, so to speak. It's very similar to FHD video vs HD. Most people can see the difference, but only after you teach them where to look (and they are at the correct distance from the screen, and the screen is not absolute crap, and this and that...
ref:
https://cdvsmp3.wordpress.com/cd-vs-itu ... t-results/
EDIT: although in the experiment above, they use a better codec than mp3 (AAC 256k VBR)
Also, the results are in a way inconclusive (my opinion), as it appears that some of the participants passed multiple times, while most failed. This could be explained by fact that most people don't know where to look, so to speak. It's very similar to FHD video vs HD. Most people can see the difference, but only after you teach them where to look (and they are at the correct distance from the screen, and the screen is not absolute crap, and this and that...
Last edited by pylkko on 2020-08-03 18:58, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Direct conversion of audio files on CD
Reading this tread got me curious about Asunder. I normally use cdparanoia (command line tool) to rip a CDs to .wav files. Then, ffmpeg (also command line) to convert from .wav to .flac. Checking out Asunder, it can rip to .wav, .flac, and .ogg (vorbis) all in one wack! (It can also rip to AAC.) You might try ogg vorbis as a replacement for MP3.vuitreviejo wrote:This may be an obvious question, but haven't been able to find a direct answer. I'm running Debian 10 with LXDE desktop. I have a large audio collection and have been using Asunder to rip CDs to FLAC, put the files on a server and use MPD to play them. I use Sound Converter to convert FLAC to MP3 for portable play.
I usually store music files as .flac, which uses lossless compression and can be converted back to .wav with no degradation.
Probably not. If you are trans coding from .wav and .flac, there should be no difference if your source is a CD or the hard drive.vuitreviejo wrote:My question is, would converting directly from CD source with Sound Converter compromise the quality of the converted file?
But, you can rip from the CD directly to .flac, .wav, and .ogg all in one shot with Asunder. You might want to give it a try. Check out the encode tab under preferences. If you want to save some space, you can rip to .flac and .ogg, with .flac being lossless and about half the size of .wav, and .ogg (vorbis) being a possible replacement for MP3 you might want to consider.
-
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2738
- Joined: 2018-06-20 15:16
- Location: Colorado
- Has thanked: 45 times
- Been thanked: 206 times
Re: Direct conversion of audio files on CD
So likely, you've never heard it, wax or no wax. If you'd like to insist there is no conflation here of what constitutes mp3, fine. Like I care. hoas, You're the red book purist, 1,411 kbit/s isn't close to magic 24/192 standard. I guess you like vibrating your wax inappropriately.CwF wrote:Debian does not have real mp3. It has lame.
The subject was settled 25 years ago - @320 You can't hear the difference, and there is only one format in my point, and again, Debian is at this time and during it's entire existence is not capable of creating said format, so to the op, yes Debian will compromise the quality using mp3 because it uses lame. I did not know this, now you do too. For real mp3 perhaps try Fedora.
Re: Direct conversion of audio files on CD
Correct me if I am wrong, but most rippers can rip to many formats at the same time. I used a non-graphical tool called abcdeRU55EL wrote:
Reading this tread got me curious about Asunder. I normally use cdparanoia (command line tool) to rip a CDs to .wav files. Then, ffmpeg (also command line) to convert from .wav to .flac. Checking out Asunder, it can rip to .wav, .flac, and .ogg (vorbis) all in one wack! (It can also rip to AAC.)
https://abcde.einval.com/wiki/
Re: Direct conversion of audio files on CD
I don't really know. [/edit]I guess I've been stuck using old, old, software. "If it aint broke..." [edit] I don't normally use a graphical CD ripper. I use cdparanoia, a command line tool, then ffmpeg to transcode to other formats.
abcde looks interesting, I am going to check it out. Thanks for posting.
abcde looks interesting, I am going to check it out. Thanks for posting.
- Head_on_a_Stick
- Posts: 14114
- Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
- Location: London, England
- Has thanked: 81 times
- Been thanked: 133 times
Re: Direct conversion of audio files on CD
My "garbage" label can be equally applied to any and all lossy codecs. I would consider a 1,411kb/s rate to be the bare minimum in respect of audio quality.CwF wrote:So likely, you've never heard it, wax or no wax. If you'd like to insist there is no conflation here of what constitutes mp3, fine.CwF wrote:Debian does not have real mp3. It has lame.
FWIW I have listened to MP3s on my smartphone (via a DragonFly Cobalt USB DAC) and they sound just awful to my ears.
I said "accept nothing less". 24/192 is indeed very good but even I will admit to difficulty differentiating it from 24/96 — moving the brickwall filter that far out doesn't really reduce ringing by a significant amount, although it does reduce the (potential) jitter levels. And anyway a lot of "24/192" files don't have any content above 48KHz, HiFi News' music reviews actually measure the bandwidth: https://www.hifinews.com/category/hi-res-downloadsCwF wrote:You're the red book purist, 1,411 kbit/s isn't close to magic 24/192 standard. I guess you like vibrating your wax inappropriately.
Cloth-eared nincompoops listening to shitty budget equipment can't tell the difference, I'll give you thatCwF wrote:The subject was settled 25 years ago - @320 You can't hear the difference
See also https://www.stereophile.com/content/hi- ... nd-testing
deadbang
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 2020-07-29 18:03
Re: Direct conversion of audio files on CD
Final OP comment. Thanks to those who took my question seriously and provided thoughtful comments. Thanks also to those who put both my children through college by buying ridiculously expensive bleeding-edge hardware to achieve imperceptible results.
-
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2738
- Joined: 2018-06-20 15:16
- Location: Colorado
- Has thanked: 45 times
- Been thanked: 206 times