I use mp3 at 256kbps, or 320 if I’m in a good mood. Mp3 plays everywhere. WMA does not. The difference in quality is minimal if not nonexistent. Mp3 has been consistently improved by the public-spirited geniuses at LAME.
EAC is a good but slow ripper, using LAME. However, for reliable (official, commercial, not user-generated) tag information, you have to go to the big bad guys: WMP or iTunes, both of which have slightly inferior encoders but convenient tagging. I usually try EAC and if the tags aren’t there–it takes a while for new albums–it’s back to iTunes or WMP. But you should also run tags through mp3tag and have it Write (under Tools/Options/Tags/Mpeg) to ID3v2.3 ISO-8859-1, the Sansa’s favorite snack. Auto-Number them with Leading Zeros (01,02) while you’re at it.
128 is not “transparent.” That was wishful thinking back when storage was minuscule. Listen to a piano or a live jazz drum kit at 128. Don’t tell me that’s transparent.
Also, there is an old, old, old “study” claiming that WMA at low bitrates is better than mp3 at low bitrates. A completely disinterested party named Micro$oft (as in Windows Media Audio) publicized it. It’s irrelevant. No one who cares about music uses low bitrates any more.
Start with 192kbps mp3, which approaches transparency. Or better yet, do a test: code a song with real acoustic instruments (not electronic ones) at 128, 192, 256 and 320 and see which one is transparent to you.