Re-Ripping my CD's : what's with the audio level measurement?

[Bucknekked]

This topic aroused my curiosity, so, this morning I experimented with a CD having an extreme amount of dynamic range. Ripping it to iTunes, I discovered a range from +1.0 to +17.4db per selection. Simply playing back these selections with sound check off I realized the "volume" notice in iTunes "file" is an indication of dynamic range, one of the selections I played having, it appears, +17.4db dynamic range. It also appears that -0.1 would have less dynamic range than let's say +0.1. Also, I ripped The Rolling Stones Steel Wheels CD and noticed it has less dynamic range than most other CD's ripped to iTunes. Even at extremely low playback levels I can hear all passages. Perhaps, that's why this CD is listenable in my Tahoe when there are all sorts of road noise distracting me as I drive down the highway. Now, all of my experimenting may be moot since ripping a CD to iTunes does not get more dynamic range. I don't think you could create less range either. Converting LP's to CD's on the other hand does allow for maximization of dynamic range at least to the extent it exists on the LP.

I am curious, how did you find or determine that a particular CD had a wide dynamic range? Did you look it up in the dynamic range database? Did you have another way to know?

Most of my collection doesn't seem to have a large dynamic range, at least according to the database

 

[MrBoat]

Man, after reading this thread, I'm not so sure I want to explore cd ripping. I think the only reason I would, is for something portable, or if the cd player in my automobile was prone to skipping, which is possible, I suppose, being that most of the vehicles I own have had a ride liken to that of an oxcart. That is, if I were to try to imagine a comparison, exaggerative, or otherwise. I just have never been a database or data storage kind of person. If there is no ridiculously obvious sound quality difference, or some ultra-corrective and easy, quality implementation feature that surpasses the original hard copy, I just can't imagine finding the time to do this. Not knocking what y'all do, it's interesting. If not, I would not have read the entire thread.

Either way, I will bookmark this exchange in the event some urge, or curiosity gets the best of me in the future to explore these options. I do find this thread informative so thank you for posting this topic.

 

[Bucknekked]

Man, after reading this thread, I'm not so sure I want to explore cd ripping. I think the only reason I would, is for something portable, or if the cd player in my automobile was prone to skipping, which is possible, I suppose, being that most of the vehicles I own have had a ride liken to that of an oxcart. That is, if I were to try to imagine a comparison, exaggerative, or otherwise. I just have never been a database or data storage kind of person. If there is no ridiculously obvious sound quality difference, or some ultra-corrective and easy, quality implementation feature that surpasses the original hard copy, I just can't imagine finding the time to do this. Not knocking what y'all do, it's interesting. If not, I would not have read the entire thread.

Either way, I will bookmark this exchange in the event some urge, or curiosity gets the best of me in the future to explore these options. I do find this thread informative so thank you for posting this topic.

MrBoat
I think you are safe where you are !
I went down the ripping route in to a computerized library because I'm a lifelong computer/IT guy.
You can weld and make boats. You make that look easy. I do computers. Its easy for me.
But, it might give y'all nothing but grief so if you're happy where you are, by all means, enjoy the happy place.

by the way, none of the ripping/burning/digitizing makes a CD sound any better than the original platter.
The original CD is still king of its domain

I also enjoy listening to the four 80 east selections. I just ordered a new Positraction CD. It will arrive monday. I am looking forward to it.

 

[Pogre]

Man, after reading this thread, I'm not so sure I want to explore cd ripping. I think the only reason I would, is for something portable, or if the cd player in my automobile was prone to skipping, which is possible, I suppose, being that most of the vehicles I own have had a ride liken to that of an oxcart. That is, if I were to try to imagine a comparison, exaggerative, or otherwise. I just have never been a database or data storage kind of person. If there is no ridiculously obvious sound quality difference, or some ultra-corrective and easy, quality implementation feature that surpasses the original hard copy, I just can't imagine finding the time to do this. Not knocking what y'all do, it's interesting. If not, I would not have read the entire thread.

Either way, I will bookmark this exchange in the event some urge, or curiosity gets the best of me in the future to explore these options. I do find this thread informative so thank you for posting this topic.

I feel the same way! Between this and the bit rate thread I think I'm just gonna stick with CDs...

I'm starting to think the less I know about the subject the better off I am. I'm a perfectionist and knowing my music is messed up, even if imperceptible, it'll drive me nuts.

 

[MrBoat]

I feel the same way! Between this and the bit rate thread I think I'm just gonna stick with CDs...

I'm starting to think the less I know about the subject the better off I am. I'm a perfectionist and knowing my music is messed up, even if imperceptible, it'll drive me nuts.

I take pride with how I handle the cd's, I never scratch them. They always look like new. I was the same way with vinyl. In spite of the technical aspects, there is something about physically enacting the mechanical process of this sport personally, that does not involve a cursor, scroll function or file. I get that ripping doesn't necessarily remove this function from the process with that option still being there, and is likely the best of both worlds. I dunno. . .I'll probably get around to messing with it. I also realize the accumulative aspect over time is a lot less burdensome than trying to imagine a ripped collection all at once, which is probably where most of my current mental block with these notions actually lies.

 

[Bucknekked]

I feel the same way! Between this and the bit rate thread I think I'm just gonna stick with CDs...

I'm starting to think the less I know about the subject the better off I am. I'm a perfectionist and knowing my music is messed up, even if imperceptible, it'll drive me nuts.

Pogre
I tell you what, if you ever decide to rip a few CD'S, just send me a note. I will give you my humble opinion on some settings and choices. Once those are done, it's like falling asleep in the recliner. Ez Pz.

Like many a topic in audio, there's the straining at a gnat by some. We can convenienty avoid straining at gnats

 

[TLS Guy]

Gosh! These consumer level programs seem really complicated and leave a lot to guess work.

I think if you are going to do a lot of work with WAV files and program compiling and editing, professional software is well worth the investment.

To do a good job you really do need a lot of information about what is going on.

WaveLab seems a lot easier then what you guys are going through.

 

[sterling shoote]

I am curious, how did you find or determine that a particular CD had a wide dynamic range? Did you look it up in the dynamic range database? Did you have another way to know?

Most of my collection doesn't seem to have a large dynamic range, at least according to the database

Gosh! These consumer level programs seem really complicated and leave a lot to guess work.

I think if you are going to do a lot of work with WAV files and program compiling and editing, professional software is well worth the investment.

To do a good job you really do need a lot of information about what is going on.

WaveLab seems a lot easier then what you guys are going through.

I agree; yet, the general ripping of CD's to iTunes is easy, as well as perfect. Last night I ripped a Hybrid SACD's CD layer to iTunes. 1. Inserted CD into laptop. 2. Opened iTunes. 3. Clicked Import CD prompt. 4. Monitored ripping progress as it was displayed on screen. 5. Upon completion of rip, ejected CD. 6. Enjoyed listening to the rip, now in my iTunes library. Now, before this process, I had earlier opened iTunes to set preferences: 1. Clicked Edit. 2 Clicked preferences and form General Preferences, clicked import settings. 3. Clicked Import using and selected ALAC encoder. 4. Clicked O.K. Regarding #3, other choices are AIFF, AAC, and MP3. Since ALAC is a lossless file type, I use it for best quality, as well as it's universal compatibility with most of today's HT receivers/preamps, devices, and streamers.

 

[TLS Guy]

I agree; yet, the general ripping of CD's to iTunes is easy, as well as perfect. Last night I ripped a Hybrid SACD's CD layer to iTunes. 1. Inserted CD into laptop. 2. Opened iTunes. 3. Clicked Import CD prompt. 4. Monitored ripping progress as it was displayed on screen. 5. Upon completion of rip, ejected CD. 6. Enjoyed listening to the rip, now in my iTunes library. Now, before this process, I had earlier opened iTunes to set preferences: 1. Clicked Edit. 2. From General Preferences, clicked import settings. 3. Clicked Import using and selected ALAC encoder. 4. Clicked O.K. Regarding #3, other choices are AIFF, AAC, and MP3. Since ALAC is a lossless file type, I use it for best quality, as well as it's universal compatibility with most of today's DAC's, player devices and Streaming processes.

You still have a laptop with a disc drive. Most do not now, mine doesn't so you would have to have an external USB drive.

Pop music has little dynamic range. Classical music often 90 db and up to 130 db for some major works, which means using some compression for CD. So that is why classical music really does require very substantial speakers and lots of head room. Although the average level is much lower.

 

[sterling shoote]

You still have a laptop with a disc drive. Most do not now, mine doesn't so you would have to have an external USB drive.

Pop music has little dynamic range. Classical music often 90 db and up to 130 db for some major works, which means using some compression for CD. So that is why classical music really does require very substantial speakers and lots of head room. Although the average level is much lower.

I recently purchased 5 multi-channel hybrid SACD's, all classical, from Amazon. I do not yet have a multi-channel SACD player so I can only listen to the Stereo SACD layer. Lot's of dynamic range. I ripped CD layer to iTunes and I've gotta tell ya, so far, I can not discern dynamics divergence from playback of SACD or CD layer. It's all great. BTW, Amazon has had some really good deals lately on SACD's, some as low as $9.99 for albums which not too long ago would have cost me twice as much. Since these are multi-channel which is not downloadable from HDtracks, they only have stereo DSD and PCM hi-res, and those are all in the $20 arena, seems SACD's are still the way to go.

 

[slipperybidness]

I take pride with how I handle the cd's, I never scratch them. They always look like new. I was the same way with vinyl. In spite of the technical aspects, there is something about physically enacting the mechanical process of this sport personally, that does not involve a cursor, scroll function or file. I get that ripping doesn't necessarily remove this function from the process with that option still being there, and is likely the best of both worlds. I dunno. . .I'll probably get around to messing with it. I also realize the accumulative aspect over time is a lot less burdensome than trying to imagine a ripped collection all at once, which is probably where most of my current mental block with these notions actually lies.

"All" of your music at your fingertips is nice! Take your entire collection to the garage (wirelessly of course) or to a friend's house. And, it is an archive that will not degrade like physical media!

But, I'm pretty much equal opportunity! Probably 25% streaming (lower quality), 25% CD, 25% from my ripped CDs, 25% vinyl.

 

[Bucknekked]

"All" of your music at your fingertips is nice! Take your entire collection to the garage (wirelessly of course) or to a friend's house. And, it is an archive that will not degrade like physical media!

But, I'm pretty much equal opportunity! Probably 25% streaming (lower quality), 25% CD, 25% from my ripped CDs, 25% vinyl.

Its nice to have balance in your life.
For a lot of reasons, mostly not technical or anything that makes sense, I added a turntable and vinyl back in to the mix this last year. So I have probably 50% in my digital ripped library, 40% in music related blu-rays, and a mere 10% splash in vinyl. I enjoy having and making a choice: what will it be today? A trip through the library? A music blu-ray concert? Or a trip down memory lane with a record. Its nice to have choices even if they don't make a lot of sense. They don't have to make sense. Its my world and I enjoy it !

 

[MrBoat]

I don't find anything wrong with digital storage, I just haven't found the need yet. I may eventually.

Some other things that are probably at play here in my situation. I rarely internet away from my desktop pc. Touch screens/small screens annoy me so smart phones, tablets etc are out. Not to mention how these items are abused, socially. Is that being a bit too old fashioned? I reckon it is. When I am at work, I'm typically incredibly focused. Entertainment doesn't really add to the experience. I can wait to get home. Someone asked me, well what if you need to know something pertinent to your job in a hurry? I'll walk into the office and use that internet. Music at work? Sure, but it's background noise and I really don't have time or the focus in that to be so selective.

 

[Bucknekked]

I don't find anything wrong with digital storage, I just haven't found the need yet. I may eventually.

Some other things that are probably at play here in my situation. I rarely internet away from my desktop pc. Touch screens/small screens annoy me so smart phones, tablets etc are out. Not to mention how these items are abused, socially. Is that being a bit too old fashioned? I reckon it is. When I am at work, I'm typically incredibly focused. Entertainment doesn't really add to the experience. I can wait to get home. Someone asked me, well what if you need to know something pertinent to your job in a hurry? I'll walk into the office and use that internet. Music at work? Sure, but it's background noise and I really don't have time or the focus in that to be so selective.

MrBoat
The more aged and decrepit I become, the clearer it is to me that multi-tasking is a fraud. Multi-tasking, ie doing many things at once, was in favor for quite a while. Lots of people sang its praises. I was never good at it and like you I found focusing on one thing and doing it well to be the way I should pursue work. People tell me I have a tunnel vision focus on a task. I wouldn't say that. I would say I just pay attention to what I'm doing until it is time for the next thing.

For music and work, I don't listen to it and try to do both either. If I'm working, I'm working and I find the focus on the task in a quiet place is much more soothing than with added entertainment. For social stuff or goofin off, I can add music to that and get enjoyment. That makes sense to me.

As for technology in your spare time, this is a place where you mileage may vary is the rule of the day.
I have a lot of the new tech toys because I did not have to learn them. I have adult children in the business and they literally taught me and my wife the joys of toys. But, if I had to learn it from scratch or the owners manual, I'm not sure I would be doing half the stuff I do.

 

[sterling shoote]

This has been a very interesting thread. It has made me think about where enjoyment of recorded music has come to from where it was back in 1974 when I purchased my first turntable. Then, LP's were clearly better sounding than FM but LP's were generally noisy, and mistracking along with poping sounds etc. undermined the experience. Also, every 20 minutes or so you'd need to get up from whatever you were doing to flip the LP. Playlists were impossible. Today, I can pull out my iPhone 7+ and access my entire music library and listen instantly to anything in the library via Airport Express/Airplay through my HT system. It sounds great whether the selection being played is coming from the iCloud in the form of an AAC file or from a 16/44 download. Seems to me it sounds as good as SACD from the SACD player. Even, the LP's I've digitized sound better than the same LP's as listened to from the turntable. Using digital technology I've removed all the annoying pops from those LP's. At any rate, today with just my iPhone I can enjoy any mix of music I'm in the mood for with only a touch or two upon my iPhones display. Simply marvelous.

 

[MrBoat]

MrBoat
The more aged and decrepit I become, the clearer it is to me that multi-tasking is a fraud. Multi-tasking, ie doing many things at once, was in favor for quite a while. Lots of people sang its praises. I was never good at it and like you I found focusing on one thing and doing it well to be the way I should pursue work. People tell me I have a tunnel vision focus on a task. I wouldn't say that. I would say I just pay attention to what I'm doing until it is time for the next thing.

For music and work, I don't listen to it and try to do both either. If I'm working, I'm working and I find the focus on the task in a quiet place is much more soothing than with added entertainment. For social stuff or goofin off, I can add music to that and get enjoyment. That makes sense to me.

As for technology in your spare time, this is a place where you mileage may vary is the rule of the day.
I have a lot of the new tech toys because I did not have to learn them. I have adult children in the business and they literally taught me and my wife the joys of toys. But, if I had to learn it from scratch or the owners manual, I'm not sure I would be doing half the stuff I do.

Yours, and some other respectable posters here are what has me even considering the merits of this. I am not as prehistoric as I come across at times. I managed at one point to be pretty adept with computers which was a huge surprise to everyone who knows me IRL.

Kind of funny that I'm a welder, through and through. Yet, I had a gfriend take me to a trade show with her company in Vegas, and their IT guy got sick, so they badged me up and I stood in for the guy and my name for the night was "Tom" the IT guy. I had all the tech folks and engineers hanging out at my table with us and my girlfriend was so amused with it all, proud even. Funnier yet when they told her to bring "Tom" back again next time.

 

[Bucknekked]

Yours, and some other respectable posters here are what has me even considering the merits of this. I am not as prehistoric as I come across at times. I managed at one point to be pretty adept with computers which was a huge surprise to everyone who knows me IRL.

Kind of funny that I'm a welder, through and through. Yet, I had a gfriend take me to a trade show with her company in Vegas, and their IT guy got sick, so they badged me up and I stood in for the guy and my name for the night was "Tom" the IT guy. I had all the tech folks and engineers hanging out at my table with us and my girlfriend was so amused with it all, proud even. Funnier yet when they told her to bring "Tom" back again next time.

I think it's funny about the welder thing. A few years ago I met a fellow and as we exchanged pleasantries I told what I did for a living and he told me he owned a welding shop and was a welder.

I made a lot of assumptions about him based on his occupation as a welder. As it turned out those were some of the most profoundly wrong assumptions I have ever made about someone. It turned in to one of those life changing times when I had to revamp and change what I made assumptions on.

I have a tremendous respect for working folks. Doesn't matter whether you strap on a stethoscope or a tool belt, if you're working, you've got my respect and then some.

If you want to try going digital someday, let me know and I would be glad to throw in a few tidbits. I don't know a lot, but there's a few things I can help with.

 

[Pogre]

Pogre
I tell you what, if you ever decide to rip a few CD'S, just send me a note. I will give you my humble opinion on some settings and choices. Once those are done, it's like falling asleep in the recliner. Ez Pz.

Like many a topic in audio, there's the straining at a gnat by some. We can convenienty avoid straining at gnats

Okay Buck, I've decided to rip a few cd's. I'll be using a windows 10 laptop computer. I would like to end up with an exact copy, uncompressed. I don't even know where to start.

I'd like to get some music on a thumb drive and play it on my Xbox 1s.

 

[-Jim-]

Okay Buck, I've decided to rip a few cd's. I'll be using a windows 10 laptop computer. I would like to end up with an exact copy, uncompressed. I don't even know where to start.

I'd like to get some music on a thumb drive and play it on my Xbox 1s.

The best two programs I have used are dBpoweramp and EAC (Exact Audio Copy). The latter is free so you may want to check it out first. http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/

I'm into FLAC files (and MP3s for my Car) but I don't know what format you are looking for on an Xbox 1s. I found a review that said "The Xbox One S can play FLAC, Apple and Windows lossless. MP3, WMA, and Apple M4V, as well as WAV files up to 7.1 channels and 96kHz/24-bit sampling rates/resolution. " So you should be fine to go that way. EAC tries to make an exact copy every time so, especially with damaged or ditry CDs, it may be slower that other rippers. But perfection is worth a little time.

dBpoweramp has a free trial for 21 days so you can check it out here: https://www.dbpoweramp.com/dmc.htm

It too worked great.

I hope this is helpful.

 

[sterling shoote]

Okay Buck, I've decided to rip a few cd's. I'll be using a windows 10 laptop computer. I would like to end up with an exact copy, uncompressed. I don't even know where to start.

I'd like to get some music on a thumb drive and play it on my Xbox 1s.

Sure, you can use any ripping program and get your CD's into Windows Audio Player; but, I'd suggest you download iTunes and try it. iTunes is intuitive; plus, it sorts out album, artist, and track identification by name automatically. I've used many programs all the way back to the first days of burning and ripping. I like iTunes best so far. Since you say you want an "exact copy, uncompressed" you can rip a WAV file at 16/44.1. You can convert those quickly later if you wish to ALAC files, for a multitude of reasons. ALAC files are lossless compressed files, which will get you bit perfect 16/44.1 performance. The majority of wired and wireless playback devices support ALAC. This means you can play, and stream your music in all means technically possible today. That's to say, you will be able to enjoy your entire digital music library on any device anytime and anywhere on the planet.