Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 217 posts

Re: Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

#31

Post by rokweom »

IndySun wrote: post #13
flatiron wrote: post #6

I remember back in the day using https://xiph.org/paranoia/ for ripping. Tons of burned cds that eventually were tossed in favor of Spotify.

This type of ripping, comparing to other rips (paranoia) for bit-for-bit error correction integrity is part of XLD for Mac et al. However, even as a full time audio person, I consider paranoia overkill, and in someways backwards - I want my rip to be my unique rip and not precisely anyone else's - though of course, it most likely is anyway. You do realise, assuming you ripped to a lossless audio format, your cd rips…

>your cd rips are 8-12x more accurate than anything streamed of Spotify?

How did you calculate a factor by which lossless is better than lossy?

Re: Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

#32

Post by thriftwy »

medler wrote: post #23
thriftwy wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linux has cdparanoia for decades now, which doea all that stuff and I'm not sure what's new about Whipper.

Whipper uses cdparanoia under the hood, but it adds features like metadata fetching, gap detection, and so forth. More details here: https://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Whipper

I remember tools such as Asunder and grip adding passable GUIs around cdparanoia.

Re: Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

#34

Post by sschueller »

thrownawaysz wrote: post #29

>Docker Maybe it's just me but when I see Docker with a project like this I already zone out. This is still just based on cdparanoia/cdrdao [0]. I wish people would just push single portable binaries instead of starting the whole process with Docker (especially when the source code is alreaedy available) 0, https://github.com/whipper-team/whipper/blob/develop/whipper... 0, https://github.com/whipper-team/whipper/blob…

I agree with you, however if I had to pick between snap and docker I would go with docker evertime.

Re: Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

#35

Post by SinePost »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #25
catseyechandra wrote: post #2

For audio geek who wants a high quality audio extraction from their CD collection

Why would I use this over abcde, another cdparanoia frontend that is packaged for every major distro?

I second this question. I've used both before; the user experience is basically the same, and there's no audible difference between the two.

Re: Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

#36

Post by mckirk »

IndySun wrote: post #13
flatiron wrote: post #6

I remember back in the day using https://xiph.org/paranoia/ for ripping. Tons of burned cds that eventually were tossed in favor of Spotify.

This type of ripping, comparing to other rips (paranoia) for bit-for-bit error correction integrity is part of XLD for Mac et al. However, even as a full time audio person, I consider paranoia overkill, and in someways backwards - I want my rip to be my unique rip and not precisely anyone else's - though of course, it most likely is anyway. You do realise, assuming you ripped to a lossless audio format, your cd rips…

> 8-12x more accurate than anything streamed of Spotify

Maybe in theory. In practice, the difference will be very hard to hear (for most people, in most scenarios). Have you ever done an ABX test to determine whether you would be able to tell the difference between lossless and Spotify's quality?[1]

I did, a while back, and while I was able to tell the difference somewhat reliably for music I knew well (and only for that kind of music), the effort and time I had to spend on finding the minute differences, even with high-end equipment, convinced me that for everyday listening, Spotify was completely fine for me.

[1]: http://abx.digitalfeed.net/spotify-hq.html

Re: Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

#37

Post by thebrid »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #25
catseyechandra wrote: post #2

For audio geek who wants a high quality audio extraction from their CD collection

Why would I use this over abcde, another cdparanoia frontend that is packaged for every major distro?

My understanding is whipper is more paranoid than abcde. whipper does a couple things to ensure a perfect rip:

* Rips tracks twice and ensures the checksums match (retrying if they do not)

* Compares the track checksums against the AccurateRip database

I think this gives much more confidence that the result is correct. The tags seem a lot more detailed with whipper too.

Re: Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

#38

Post by saba2008 »

jancsika wrote: post #19
accrual wrote: post #3

This is pretty cool, it's like a Python and *nix version of Exact Audio Copy (EAC) for Windows. I enjoy the ritual of perfectly ripping a CD. I can spend an hour or two scanning the artwork, verifying the track names, performing the rip, losslessly compressing (I prefer FLAC), generating .cue files, checksuming everything, then sitting down to experience the best possible digital copy of a physical item I can self pr…

For your setup-- if I do original CD -> accrual's rip -> burned CD, does burned CD == original CD for all values of original CD? I'm mostly thinking of those interstitial lead-in thingies on live and concept albums. E.g., if you let a CD play from track 1 to track 2, there may be 5 seconds of crowd noise leading in to track 2. CD players would show this as track 2 at timing "-5", then count down to zero to get to the…

Single file + CUE sheet solves lead-in thingie problem, by storing both timestamps (time when player should start showing 'Track 2', and time which servers as zero for track-relative timestamps)

It pretty much mirrors actual CD structure of TOC (containing all necessary timestamps and metadata) and continuous sequence of frames with audio data

Re: Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

#39

Post by jdsully »

thrownawaysz wrote: post #29

>Docker Maybe it's just me but when I see Docker with a project like this I already zone out. This is still just based on cdparanoia/cdrdao [0]. I wish people would just push single portable binaries instead of starting the whole process with Docker (especially when the source code is alreaedy available) 0, https://github.com/whipper-team/whipper/blob/develop/whipper... 0, https://github.com/whipper-team/whipper/blob…

Docker is a life saver if your shipping software on Linux. Otherwise you’re going to have to deal with endless bug reports from oddball distros. Docker lets you test with a stable set of dependencies and know that’s what your users will see.

Re: Whipper: Accurate Audio CD Ripping

#40

Post by tyrust »

thrownawaysz wrote: post #29

>Docker Maybe it's just me but when I see Docker with a project like this I already zone out. This is still just based on cdparanoia/cdrdao [0]. I wish people would just push single portable binaries instead of starting the whole process with Docker (especially when the source code is alreaedy available) 0, https://github.com/whipper-team/whipper/blob/develop/whipper... 0, https://github.com/whipper-team/whipper/blob…

There are alternatives listed directly below the Docker instructions. Seems like a silly reason to write-off a project.
Post reply on HN