How-To: Rip Archival-Quality MP3s from Audio CDs



+ Add a Comment


thank you. this article is very helpful.




As I understand it, the point of this article is to help users create archival quality MP3s. With that in mind, the command line switch used can be simplified.

Here's what's suggested:

%l-V 5%l%h-V 0%h --vbr-new %s %d

Here's all you need:

-V0 %s %d

The %l-V 5%l and %h-V 0%h portion isn't needed because they indicate to use low quality or high quality, respctively, according to what radio button you select on the Compression Options -> External Compressoin tab. If High quality is selected, and all the user should be using, the other portions can be exluded.

Also, according to Hyrdorgen Audio's Wiki on LAME, as of LAME 3.98, --vbr-new is no longer needed.

"Note: The switch --vbr-new, which enabled a superior VBR mode in LAME 3.97 and some previous versions, is no longer needed with LAME 3.98 as it is now the default VBR mode. However, if you're still using LAME 3.97 or older, you have to add --vbr-new to your commandline to use that mode."

-V0 %s %d will do everything you need.



In EAC 1.0 beta 2 and onward, the replacement strings have changed:

-V0 %source% %dest%



Thanks for that info



I always save CD music in WAV format, becuase the audio quality is preseved and the file format is compatible with any system, even a Windows 3.1 system, lol.

I will only use MP3 for portability, but not for main listening use. MP3 is LAME!



Thanks for the  info 

I use [audio CD Ripper] as its easy & simple , fast while ripping , supports many extensions & it has a sweet interface ]

U can try it here :-



Rip CDs to FLAC format to archive and mp3 for portable players, it's normal for me.



Here's my, 3.5 cents worth:

1.) IF you want ARCHIVAL back-ups, then go with a lossless format (or a straight, FULL WAV)...EAC CAN do that, so I don't feel it is all THAT is all a matter of configuring it to do so. You can even SAVE the WAV files instead of deleteing them after the MP3 encoding (one simple config. option); THAT way, you get BOTH a purely digital reproduction, AND a High Quality MP3 for your car, ipod, and such.

2.) If you want SPEED(TheSimulatorGuy), you can just run it without error correction (Un-Secure mode), and it'll give you a ONE pass rip, scratches, skips, and pops, and ALL(or, just continue to use CDex)....un-secure mode is GREAT for BRAND NEW CD's. But if you have old, scratched - up CD's that are long overdue for replacement, have no FEAR, secure mode continues to re-read the same segment over and over until it gets so many MATCHING samples of the DIGITAL information, EXCLUDING any distortions caused by the scratches, fingerprints and What-Not. That is the WHOLE idea behind the project (EXACT Audio Copy, EAC), and trashing this FREELY AVAILABLE piece of code is simply a waste of your breath (or keyboarding). CDex does not offer this error correction, I checked the specs.

3.)Years ago (April, 2004, to be exact...I STILL have a copy of the article I made), when MaxPC put out a similar article, and I followed all the instructions for all of my CD's, most of my collection went very smoothly in secure mode, (3 to 7 minutes, depending on the MINOR CD flaws)...but I had ONE CD where the last song was COMPLETELY trashed...IF an audio player or CD player even gave you any sound AT ALL, it was just a bunch of garbled NOISE...and that ONE song happened to be one of my absolute favorites, so it was worth it, to me, to let EAC do it's thing....and 24+ hours later, I had a NEARLY pristine DID have two loud POPS in it, but, as bad off as it was to begin with, EAC totally proved itself to me.

.5)Also, once it is configured properly, it is TRULY as simple as 1,2,3...1.)Fire up EAC;2.) insert disc;3.) click and go...It pulls Artist, Title, and Song info from FreeDB and TAGS everything Automatically.




Then your point is to use mp3 as a format to use in a car stereo or portable player and not for archival purposes...




 I have ripped all my music CDs to "lossy" high-bitrate MP3's for use in my car stereo (I can load up a CD full of MP3's or even use up to a 32GB thumb drive), but I also took the time to make "archival copies" of all 650 of my CDs with CloneCD on a massive RAID array drive, and then threw the actual CDs in storage.

What car stereo plays FLAC or AAC?  For that matter, what car stereo could do FLAC justice vs a mid-bitrate MP3?

 I guess if I cared more about high-end (ie, irrationally expensive) home stereo equipment than high-end (yes, perhaps irrationally expensive, but I lot it) gaming computer/video equipment then I'd worry about FLAC.


Building PC's is a sweet hobby, but it takes a lot of cash to keep up...



Nice to see another article on EAC. I'll leave the MP3 vs FLAC arguments to others. (But I'm a FLAC person myself.) What I want to know and see is an Exact Audio Copy installation on Windows 7. While I have yet to try it myself, a simple search will show that there are a number of problems with EAC in Windows 7. Many can be worked around, but I want it to work as well as it did on XP!

Help me Maximum PC. Will Smith says it's his goal to re-rip all his old CDs using EAC...does he plan to do it using 64-bit Windows 7? Please tell us how to do it right.




Just loaded it on Win 7 Home Premium x64, works like a charm, as per the instructions in the article.




Watch out one of the download links for EAC takes you to a German website and the file contains a trojan according to MSE. DO NOT DOWNLOAD THE FILE FROM HERE: It has a trojan WATCH OUT.



Check this out



Well You can argue that for most people there is no diference between an mp3 at high bit rates and a file on a lossless format. You may be right. Nevertheless mp3 being a loosy format it could not be considered as a format for archival purpouses. Then, what are the advantages of a mp3 file over a loosless codec like flac or ape? First I think is the software support. For mp3 there are plenty of software that support the format, you can not make the same argument for Flac or ape. Hardware support? I mean, you can play an mp3 almost on any device, including portable playes or car stereos, you have a few choices of portable players that support loseless files, and I am not aware of any car stereo that can handle them.

Having say all the above I can make a few remarks

a) You can use mp3 for your portable player or car stereo, not for archival purpouses

b) If you are in to digital archiving your music collection, I think the way to go is to use a secure ripper like EAC or DBpoweramp and a loseless codec. With the price of hardrives today, that is totally feasible.

c) I will not recomend using either wmp or I tunes ripping functions since they are not secure. EAC as cumbersome as it can be for some, is the way to go.



I spent half an hour struggling to get the additional command line parameters to parse from EAC into LAME.

It wasn't until I realized there were spaces omitted between two of the parameters that it all came together.

Here's the string that worked for me:

%1-V 5(space)%1%h-V 0(space)%h --vbr-new %s %d

The codeword (space) shows the two locations where I added a single space to the command string.

My 60 year old sex, drugs, and rock'n'roll ruined ears can hear the difference between high quality EAC rips and what iTunes produces in any of its lossy formats. EAC just sounds better to me. YMMV.



Well doesn't iTunes bitrate cap out at 128 or 192 kbps? That's pretty low. I rip my mp3's at 320 bit rate. Not saying you still wouldn't notice a difference but iTunes sucks for quality.



I appreciated this article. The MP3s I've made are noticeably better than tracks converted with iTunes. ...Now i just have to drag out all my CDs again...


 "Do you feel the force!?!?!...What about now?"



I can see why this would be attractive. Some folks, like myself, have cars that only play MP3's on their radios. Not only that, but not everyone is really into the whole digital music ripping thing themselves, they just know MP3 and that's it. They don't bother with FLAC and other lossless audio formats because of a couple of reason I can think of off the top of my head. 1. They aren't techie enough to know about other formats, much less how to go about using them and 2. most people simply cannot tell the difference between a high bit-rate MP3 and a FLAC ripped track. 

The article appeals to many people for a variety of reasons. For me, I like using FLAC for archiving, but would prefer a high quality MP3 rip for my cars. After all, just about everyone can tell the difference between a low quality MP3 rip, like one done by iTunes, and a high quality MP3 rip. 

MaximumPC Moderator

***The views I express are my own and do not represent the views of MaximumPC Magazine or Future US.***



While I agree the whole article title is misleading, to be honest with you, if you really want to archive the CD, rip it once and store it in some place and never use it again.

Oh and rip it in MP3, because many tests will tell you that a majority of folks can't tell the difference between high bitrate MP3s and FLAC.



I'm just curious why anybody would bother going to this length just to rip a CD to mp3 format?

If you want to archive your music, rip it to FLAC or just make a backup of the disc itself.



why would anyone even bother to do this?...just use itunes



I hate iTunes. Low bitrate and DRM (yeah I know you can get rid of your DRM for a fee or whatever it is they did). I just buy CD's cheap on and then rip them to 320 kbps MP3.



You would do this if you cared about the audio quality.  iTunes is known for having a relatively poor MP3 encoder.  The LAME encoder can create a file with better sound quality in the same size file.  

But I agree with simplymortified, the best way to archive a CD is to rip it to a lossless codec, such as FLAC, WAV, or even ALAC for you apple lovers.  



not if you use the aac encoder, heck it is even proven to be better than mp3 at a certain bitrate, also if i want lossless audio, i use the apple lossless encoder whis is much better than wav encoder and if you want true backup, make an iso  image of your disc, simple as that.



Actually the only true archival 'copy' (and in the archiving sense I define a copy as something that is in no way qualitativly different from the original) of a CD is uncompressed Audio. Anything else (no matter how close) is a degraded or changed copy. Even an uncompressed copy should only be called an access or reference copy. A true archive copy of a CD would nessicitate buying a second copy of the CD and boxing it. Sorry if that is a bit pedantic, but I am a practicing archivist and peoples use of 'archive' in the IT field annoyes me. In this case Backup would be more appropriate.







of course, this article is really retarded.



Whenever I try to download EAC from the link provided in the article on this site I get a virus warning. There are too many red flags associated with this whole deal to lead me to give it a try . . .



 The virus is a false alarm. Check out


then (adverb) \'then\: denotes time
than (conjunction) \'than\: denotes comparison
ex., 1 is first, THEN 2; but, 2 is more THAN 1.



Nuff said!



max pc, this article is crap, read this:




If you're going to jack up the MP3 bitrate that high you might as well use FLAC, which actually *is* archival quality. MP3 is lossy, which makes it a poor choice for archiving, and it isn't very efficient to create huge high-bitrate MP3s that are still lossy.



Seconded - I screamed out loud when I saw "archival" and "MP3" on the same page of the magazine.



Fuck EAC. CDex will rip cd's that EAC will choke on. I let EAC work on a cd overnight and it did nothing. Same cd, same drive and CDex ripped it in ten minutes. At 320

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.