Ripping problem..
 

I just ripped a CD in hopes that I coudl share it with my fellow members. Howver, I think it has ripped in WMA format since I ripped it using WIndows media program. I have transferred the songs to my "shared" area and of course now I realize that they cannot be opened. I did see some listed in a search that I did and others must be having the same dilemma
Any advise out there as to how I can automatically convert these to mp3 format without a lot of software intervention? Or should I rip in other software??:confused:

If you are interested in quality, ditch WMP, and use Exact Audio Copy for the rips to WAV files, then use Lame 3.90 to convert these to MP3. Also highly recommended is to load the WAVs into an editor and (at least) normalise them. You'd be amazed at what crap (in terms of technical quality) is released on CD.

Yeah its a lot of extra work, and the investment in knowledge is substantial, but its really worth it, if you want good MP3s.

reply re ripping
 

tks for advise sounds like u have had lots of experience i will download those programs and try it out
Btw when you say WMP you mean Windows Media player rt?
thanks

In all seriousness, wma is not so portable across all OS platforms or portable mp3 players. So ... why not rip them as mp3 or m4a? Lame is the best encoder type for files between about 90 thru to 200 kbps or so. It's a type of encoder. Yes wmp = windows media player.

It's generally recommended to rip at 192 kbps or higher (& in stereo) VBR (Variable Bit Rate) depending upon the music at hand. The higher the bit rate, the more popular it will be. It may mean slightly higher file sizes but the downlder will appreciated it much more. Don't forget to put id3 tags on all the files you rip.

Some other decent players: 1. dBpowerAMP, - 2. WinAmp, - 3. Quintessential (QCD), - 4. iTunes
* Good tagging tools: http://massid3lib.sourceforge.net/

These links might also be of interest; http://www.riptastic.com/help/1.11/mp3_encoder.htm

http://www.highwaymp3.com/FAQS/music...ukebox_faq.htm

http://www.musicmatch.com/download/p...put&BTD=1&DID=

http://sourceforge.net/projects/cdexos/

In the early days of mp3 it was recommended to rip at very low bit rates. But nowadays with larger HDD's & now reasonably large portable players, people are looking more toward quality & less worried about file size. So higher bit rates are genuinely wanted. 320 kbps is the maximum for a normal mp3. (Some allow higher but not recommended b/c not many players recognise mp3's at higher than 320.) If you see m4a files at higher than 320 kbps then they are most likely apple lossless formats, similar to APE/Monkey lossless or FLAC.

reply re ripping
 

Many thanks for all that info. I have lot to learn I can see that. WIll try to get further info b4 I try to rip any more I wonder if I can take these WMedia files and convert them I suppose I could do so .
Ido not understand that you mean by
by id3 tags?
Will check out these sites thanks again. J

Re: reply re ripping
 

Yeah.

I really don't like ripping to anything but a plain, uncompressed WAV file, then using Lame later (after edits, et cetra) to convert to mp3. There is a difference, particularly when it is considered that your ripper is doing twice (or more work, encodig as wel as ripping, increasing the chances for a dropout or other anomaly.

Also, I encode to mp3 "wide open," meaning using a 320kHz bandwidth and quality switch 0. The command line is: lame -b 320 -q 0 -m s -p xxx.wav xxx.mp3. The -p option is optional depending on if you want CRC checking. (Yes, Lame is a commmand-line tool, but will run in CMD.EXE in XP just fine. I use 4dos on my 98 box.)

I know all this must sound like Greek to a noob, but in six months with diligent effort, you'll understand it, and perhaps even why I make these recommmedations, and perhaps even dispute them :-).

ID3 Tags are areas of the mp3 file where extra (texutal) information is stored such as Artist, Album, Year, Song Name, Comments, et cetra. It is recommended to stick with ID3v1.1, rather than ver 2.

have fun.

Re: Re: reply re ripping
 

Matter of opinion I guess because it makes it compatible with all old computers & softw. But personally I always ensure both are used with emphasis on version 2.

I had heard reports of file corruption with v.2, so that's why I said that, and have avoided that version myself, just to prevent problems. One is stored at the beginning of the file, the other at the end. Maybe thats no longer the case (the corruption issue) though. Maybe it depends on which tagger one uses? I use the one from MeeSoft.

What annoys me about version 1.1 of the id3 tag is the lack of details because it only allows a minimum no. of characters & details. It's annoying because often details, including the filename/title are cut short.

I wasn't aware of issues with corruption with version 2 (this might be due to the particular program/version used to tag. I don't know!) I use a combination of Media Rage/mp3 Rage & iTunes for my tagging. The reason I suggested massid3lib.sourceforge.net/ is I've 'heard' its good. You can simply put your cursor over the top of the song on the desktop & the id3 tag will show (similar to putting your cursor over search results in LW.) So then you can check to see if it has an id3 tag or the correct id3 tag very quickly. I haven't actually tried it myself however.

For the past 11 mths I'd been considering putting up a Sticky about audio tools, ripping, FAQ, etc. However, there's so many varied opinions on the topic I've been a little reluctant to actually do it.

lol, yep peeps are picky about their audio stuff. personally I decided to adopt the übernet standard for my own use (which see).

I agree with the criticism of the 1.1 tags, but I rarely use that much info ('cept for long song titles) so its not that much of an issue, least for me.

I use CoolEditPro for conversion to 32-bit 48kHz WAV/editing, save as 16-bit WAV, then use the Lame console app for the final mp3, with the tagger as per above. It takes a long time, but its worth it. (Took me a long time just to learn to use Cool Edit!)

Wow you folks area really into this stuff.
I am a neophyte so am stumped by some of the terms. I will continue to gander at the various sites to learn more. Thanks for your input:)