What are you using to rip your cds to a hard drive?

He listens to Trumpet music. Although he probably avoids Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass for obvious reasons. He’s also quite fond of Pink Floyd’s The Wall.

maplegrovemusic
The dreaded phone book is causing problems ? Who know ? Is having a Bible in the house bad too?

Is having a Bible in the house bad? No, not in general. But it IS bad for the sound. (Hmmmm, he might be catching on.) Don’t worry, though, a telephone book is worse.

almarg
As I and many others have acknowledged many times in past threads here, science and engineering can neither explain nor predict a lot about what we hear or don’t hear from our systems.

>>>Then why are you obsessing over these controversial tweaks? You and many others? Ah, the old strength in numbers strategy. Good move! 😀

almarg
However the science and engineering that is involved in the copying of digital data from one storage medium to another is well understood, well developed, and under reasonable circumstances is robust, reliable, and accurate. Especially, in this case, if the software being used assures bit perfect accuracy.

>>>>Huh? That’s exactly what naysayers and the industry have been saying since the dawn of digital. Perfect Sound Forever! Yada yada yada. You might as well claim the Reed Solomon error correction codes correct all errors, then you wouldn’t even have to use the "read until perfect" argument. Or that the laser servo mechanism ensures 100% foolproof Tracking. Besides if CDs are so perfect how come they sound so bad? 

almarg
While I don’t dispute that some of Geoff’s tweaks might be beneficial under some circumstances when a CD is being listened to, they have no relevance whatsoever to the process of copying the data that is on a CD to a hard drive. Assuming, again, that the software is designed to re-read data as necessary to assure bit perfect accuracy, and to indicate an error in the unusual event that it is unable to do so.

>>>>>Some of my tweaks might be beneficial? Uh, which ones, I’m curious? The ones that make "good engineering sense"? The ones like vibration isolation. Which ones do you believe wouldn’t be beneficial? The ones that are too preposterous sounding, right? The ones like the Telephone book tweak or the Super Intelligent Chip or the Morphic Message Labels. And have you actually heard ANY of them anywhere? I get the picture, Al.


Cheerios

Almarg
While I don’t dispute that some of Geoff’s tweaks might be beneficial under some circumstances when a CD is being listened to, they have no relevance whatsoever to the process of copying the data that is on a CD to a hard drive. Assuming, again, that the software is designed to re-read data as necessary to assure bit perfect accuracy, and to indicate an error in the unusual event that it is unable to do so.

I say this as someone having extensive background in digital design, and particular expertise regarding computer technology. I also say this despite Geoff’s disagreement that will inevitably follow. And for some perspective on the kinds of tweaks he recommends, you may find the following excerpt from his post dated 9-7-2012 in this thread to be of interest:

Geoffkait: Taking all telephone books out of the house will usually be audible when you go back and listen to the system. Even if the telephone books are in other rooms of the house, they should be removed. The telephone book is perceived as an intruder by virtue of the fact that it is linked to a strong Field created by the tens or hundreds of thousands of identical telephone books. So, the link to that field can be eliminated by removing the telephone books from the house, making the house Safe from the telephone book "information field".

>>Whoa! What's up with all the angst? Al, all this turmoil begs the question: do you ever actually listen to any of the tweaks you disparage? Do you consult your textbooks to see if there’s a chapter on Telephone Tweaks? By the way, using your "extensive background in digital design" as some sort of evidence, proof or hammer is nothing more than an Appeal to Authority, you know, an illogical argument.

geoff kait
machina dramatica
no goats no glory

Whoa! What? Hey, Al, of course my disagreement will inevitably follow. Just like you inevitably go for the bait. You say it’s "well understood." but by whom? I dare say not by you, judging from what you say. More to follow....stay tuned.

Dynaquest
Be careful with what you read here. Geoffkait, in a previous post, mentions a checklist of things to do before ripping your CD’s. I’ll just highlight one. He says to demagnetize your CD’s before ripping. Huh? Optical discs are encoded with digital ones and zeros that are read with a laser. Any “magnetic charge” that might be possessed by any of the minute metals in the disc will make no difference whatsoever (positive or negative – pun intended) in the data read from the CD that is sent to the DAC. In other words a “demagnetizer” performs no useful function and is a SCAM…even if you pay more than $1800.00 for one – still a scam.

Huh? The optical discs are not encoded with ones and zeros. They contain pits and between the pits flat spaces (lands), each with variable lengths, which must be decoded to obtain the ones and zeros later on. The reading of the pits and lands is actually an analog process, and one subject to the vagaries of these flakey devices. That’s why demagnetizers and ionizers and coloring of the disc and the tray improves the sound. I know what you’re thinking: gee, but I thought error detection/error correction took care of all that stuff. 😄

9 things I suspect will improve the whole ripping process:

1. Isolate the CD player and the ripper.

2. Treat the CD being ripped with liquid type enhancer.

3. Demagnetize the CD prior to ripping.

4. Demagnetize the cabling.

5. Use some sort of anti static method prior to ripping.

6. Use better cables and power cords.

7. Color the CD to be treated.

8. Color the CD tray.

9. Ensure CD is absolutely level during ripping.