the BEST free MP3 Encoder for ripping CDs - and works with Windows XP

Hi,

I just bought a Sansa e260, and I am interested to learn what Encoder(s) Sandisk owners use when ripping CDs for your Sansa MP3 players.

For a year or so, I have been using Windows Media Audio 9 [WMA9] to rip my CDs to WMA format at 192 kbps, 320 kbps CBR, and Lossless.  The GUI or front-end software I currently use is jetAudio 7.1.8.4006 - its free and, in my opinion, easier to use than WMP9, WMP10 or WMP11.

But its the ENCODER that I am most interested in.  I read that LAME 1.98.1 is an excellent MP3 encoder, however, thus far, compared to WMA9, particularly at 128Kbps and below, LAME 1.98.1 is just that - lame.  WMA9 is VASTLY superior at these lower compression factors.  That being said, I must add that I cannot hear the difference between WMA9 and LAME 1.98.1 at 320Kbps.

Thank you for sharing your perspective on who makes the BEST free ENCODER for ripping your CDs.

 

As this thread progresses, so too goes my perspective.

 

With kindest regards,

 

CurlySue :slight_smile:

Message Edited by CurlySue on 03-02-2009 07:47 PM

I just recently started using this one http://www.freerip.com/install.php?disid=2

I had been looking for a free application that would let me rip to VBR MP3, without having to import any source code. This was suggested one day by one of the other members here, and it is easy as pie to set up .

I really like EAC, or Exact Audio Copy, because you get some assurance from the AccurateRip database that the rip you did is correct, plus the error correction is outstanding.  You can get good results from even scratched CDs if you just let it run.  It takes some setting up to work the way you want, but after that, it is fairly brainless.  Put the CD in and press Go.

I rip everything to flac for archival purposes, then transcode to Ogg Vorbis via foobar2k for portable use, but you can transcode to whatever format you prefer.

@curlysue wrote:

Hi, 

 

I just bought a Sansa e260, and would like to learn what software/encoder(s) other Sandisk owners are using to rip CDs for your MP3 players.

 

For a year or so, I have been using jetAudio 7.1.8.4006 (front-end software) with Windows Media Audio 9 encoder to rip my CDs to WMA format at 192 kbps, 320 kbps CBR, and Lossless.  I am pretty sure that this encoder is, at best, average.  Therefore, its time to try something new. Prior to posting, I read that LAME 1.98.1 is an excellent MP3 encoder.  I also looked at front-end programs, like Audiograbber and LameFE, but I have not tried any of them yet.  

 

Thanks in advance for sharing your perspective on what software and encoder you are using to rip your CDs. 

 

CurlySue

Message Edited by CurlySue on 03-01-2009 03:16 AM

I guess the question that needs to be asked…Do you want programs that are easy or fast to use OR Do you want the best possible audio files possible?  FreeRip does a decent job and is a breeze to navigate, but it isn’t necessarily the best application out there (I know… this is very subjective).

I agree with tenzip that Exact Audio Copy probably provides the best CD rips and can even recover audio information from damaged CDs.  It takes a bit of time to initially set up; but that is usually done only once.  The website can be found HERE

If you are more comfortable using a front-end with the LAME codec, just experiment and find one that works for you.  Front-ends don’t do much more than give the codec a GUI, it won’t alter the quality of your resulting mp3’s.  Lame Front-End or Razor Lame should work equally well.  Audiograbber is a virtual antique, but it probably would work as well.

Personally, in the rare instances where I have to encode to mp3 for a client (I am an ogg vorbis and FLAC person) I first use EAC then encode using lame (within a sound restoration package I use).

Hope you find a program or programs that work for you…:smiley:

I also use Windows XP and I like dBpoweramp CD ripper.  The basic program is free to use but some useful features, like the LAME encoder, require payment. It does have a free trial period on the full features. 

I find it to be very easy to use. It automatically tags with meta data from online data bases. It also checks AccurateRip database automatically and has the option to do SecureRip error recovery. It can encode to almost all the popular formats, Lame MP3, ogg vorbis, flac, aac, wma, etc.

It’s also handy at transcoding from one format to another. 

I used EAC for many years and it works well, but I find dbpoweramp to be easier and faster to use.

Message Edited by Alohamora on 03-01-2009 10:17 AM

Message Edited by Alohamora on 03-01-2009 10:21 AM

Thank you Marvin_Martian, tenzip,  fuze_owner-GB and Alohamora for spending a few minutes to reply to my post.

After reviewing each response, I see that my initial post emphasized the GUI over the ENCODER.  I apologize for that. 

The primary focus should be on the ENCODER. 

Therefore, I am updating my initial post accordingly.

Thanks again to all of you!  :slight_smile:

CurlySue

I dont know if it matters to you, but when(if) gappless playback becomes avalible if you want to use it, you need your files to have been made with the LAME codec. I dont know if it does LAME mp3 encoding, but Media Monkey is a great one for ripping and managing your files. You will however have to purchace the Gold edition eventually because you can only rip to Mp3 for the first 30 days.

CurlySue…

If you want an encoder that sounds good at low bit rates, you should give ogg vorbis an audition or two.  It is known for having better sound quality at lower bit rates than most of the other encoders out there.  So, if you want a good balance between file size and sound quality, I would suggest ogg vorbis.

@fuze_owner_gb wrote:

CurlySue…

 

If you want an encoder that sounds good at low bit rates, you should give ogg vorbis an audition or two.  It is known for having better sound quality at lower bit rates than most of the other encoders out there.  So, if you want a good balance between file size and sound quality, I would suggest ogg vorbis.

 

 

Keep in mind that there are a few bugs in ogg playback when using some encoders. It seems to me that this happens when the song is ripped to mp3 and then converted to ogg.

@conversionbox wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:

CurlySue…

 

If you want an encoder that sounds good at low bit rates, you should give ogg vorbis an audition or two.  It is known for having better sound quality at lower bit rates than most of the other encoders out there.  So, if you want a good balance between file size and sound quality, I would suggest ogg vorbis.

 

 


Keep in mind that there are a few bugs in ogg playback when using some encoders. It seems to me that this happens when the song is ripped to mp3 and then converted to ogg.

I have N-E-V-E-R had playback issues using ogg vorbis.  I also would never encode from mp3 to ogg…

@fuze_owner_gb wrote:


@conversionbox wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:

CurlySue…

 

If you want an encoder that sounds good at low bit rates, you should give ogg vorbis an audition or two.  It is known for having better sound quality at lower bit rates than most of the other encoders out there.  So, if you want a good balance between file size and sound quality, I would suggest ogg vorbis.

 

 


Keep in mind that there are a few bugs in ogg playback when using some encoders. It seems to me that this happens when the song is ripped to mp3 and then converted to ogg.


I have N-E-V-E-R had playback issues using ogg vorbis.  I also would never encode from mp3 to ogg…

Right! If you get to ogg directly there is no issue. Unforutnatly for me… I had my whole collection in mp3 and wanted to switch, its something I have to deal with. Just want to let poeple know that if they cant re rip straight to ogg it may not be worth it.

@curlysue wrote:
Thank you Marvin_Martian, tenzip,  fuze_owner-GB and Alohamora for spending a few minutes to reply to my post.

After reviewing each response, I see that my initial post emphasized the GUI over the ENCODER.  I apologize for that. 

The primary focus should be on the ENCODER. 

Therefore, I am updating my initial post accordingly.

Thanks again to all of you!  :slight_smile:

CurlySue

You’re welcome.

The best MP3 encoder would be (IMO) LAME. LAME is used by a bunch of different front-end programs.  As someone else mentioned, gapless playback won’t be possible with other encoders.

If you google “Lame mp3 encoder” you should find the official website, and they have links to software that uses their encoder.

Edit:  After re-reading your edited first post, I agree with a previous poster, you should take a look at ogg vorbis for music.  What kind of material are you using?  (music, spoken word, etc?)

Message Edited by tenzip on 03-01-2009 05:37 PM

I dont know if it matters to you, but when(if) gappless playback becomes avalible if you want to use it, you need your files to have been made with the LAME codec. I dont know if it does LAME mp3 encoding, but Media Monkey is a great one for ripping and managing your files. You will however have to purchace the Gold edition eventually because you can only rip to Mp3 for the first 30 days.

Thank you for responding to my posting, Conversionbox.  :slight_smile:

 

When I first read your response, I did not know exactly what gapless playback was, however, after using Audiograbber for the first time, I ** saw its “Rip Offset” option tab and thought it may have something to adjusting the spacing between audio tracks.  **

 

A quick Google later ** and I found a definition that sounds applicable: "…no pause in playback between the end of one audio file and the beginning of the next audio file…"  Looks like Audiograbber’s Rip Offset option already offers a manual approach to gapless playback.  Though, my interpretation may be wrong here.**

Thanks for the Media Monkey suggestion - I will give it a try.  :slight_smile:

CurlySue

Thank you for another reply, fuze_owner!  :smiley:

If you want an encoder that sounds good at low bit rates, you should give ogg vorbis an audition or two.  It is known for having better sound quality at lower bit rates than most of the other encoders out there.  So, if you want a good balance between file size and sound quality, I would suggest ogg vorbis.

I shall give "ogg vorbis’ a try.  At the same time, I should mention that a low bit rate is not my goal or objective.  Prior to posting, I read ** (somewhere) that it was difficult to tell the differences between ENCODERS at high bite rates.  Therefore, I theorized that comparing encoders at low bit rates would expose the lesser encoder’s weakness(es).  As a result, I speculated that the lesser encoder may have flaws at high bit rates that I simply can not hear or distinguish.  After reading your reply, fuze_owner, it looks like my encoder education is **just beginning because it appears that my “speculation” may be similarly flawed. 

MY FIRST SANSA
Before I bought the e260, I was a happy Sansa M240 owner. :)  It was my first MP3 player - a Christmas gift.  Back then, my storage goal was simple, given its 973 MB limit, I wanted to load it with 250 to 300 decent sounding tracks.  My first experience ripping CDs was with Windows Media Player 9.  I remember being overwhelmed by settings that appeared to have nothing to do with ripping CDs.  Then, one day, during a Windows Update, there were 2 or 3 Microsoft Security Updates for WMP and that is when I decided that I had enough of WMP - too many peripheral settings, and I had no interest in dealing with multiple (and likely future) security vulnerabilities. 

Next, I tried Audiograbber and LAME.  Given my storage goal, just like my current experience (described above), I as not impressed by ****LAME’s audio quality at low bit rates. 

Then, a friend suggested JetAudio.  He said it used the WMA9 encoder and the GUI was cool looking and easy to navigate.  ** Immediately fond of its VBR option, I squeezed 300+ tracks on my M240 at an average of 64Kbps.  But, like many audio enthusiasts, I started yearning for higher quality and therefore higher bit rates, even when my ears thought 64Kbps wma tracks sounded as good, if not better than, as 128Kpbs LAME mp3 tracks.  I lasted over a year, and one day, about a month ago, I erased all my 64Kbps (average) VBR tracks, an re-ripped several of my favorite CDs at 320Kbps and was AMAZED by my M240’s reproduction quality.  So much so, I started looking for a new player that could easily hold 300+ tracks at 320Kbps.  **

PRESENT DAY
After comparing various player features at Sandisk’s Sansa website, given its microSD expandability and its rechargeable battery, I chose ** the e200 series.  I almost bought a refurbished e240 from TigerDirect at $37 with shipping, but then saw Newegg was selling new e260 for $42 with free shipping.  The choice was obvious and my new e260 arrived less than a week ago, today.  With its 3807MB internal memory, the e260 may hold 200 to 300 tracks at 320Kbps CBR.  I know, what happened to my fondness for VBR?  For now, I am putting it on the shelf ****and in the CBR groove.  :)  Given its microSD expandability, I can add hundreds of 320Kbps tracks!  :smiley:**

I never knew about this WONDERFUL website or the Sandisk Community ** Forums until about two weeks ago.  I think it was a link at the Sansa Store **that got me here, but it may have been a Google search as well - I do not remember. 

Wanting to verify e260 characteristics and resolve an issue or two, prior to this posting, I posted queries regarding e260 output impedance, ** firmware revisions, and Sandisk’s media converter - though not in that order.  Thus far, I have had nothing but EXCELLENT experiences in ****the Sansa forums.  :slight_smile:**

Due to the courtesy of some extraordinarily kind, knowledgeable and generous forum members, I am now armed with a variety of solutions, ** new knowledge and a quest to maximize my e260 listening experience - while my hearing is still good.  Unfortunately, I also finding myself back to dealing with encoders.  **

THIS FORUM
After spending a few hours perusing the Internet and looking at the variety of encoders and GUIs available today, many that were also
** around back when I got my M240, many of which have not been updated since (or before then), I grew overwhelmed by the variety and then something occurred to me.  Why not search the Sansa forums and see if others Sansa owners had to say about this issue.  After a few looks, I decided to post my own query and I think you know the rest of the story.  :wink:**

Thanks again for your support and follow-up suggestion, fuze_owner.  Even though I am presently biased by 320Kbps, I am looking forward ** to giving “ogg orbis” a spin or two.  :slight_smile:**

Best regards,

CurlySue
Message Edited by CurlySue on 03-01-2009 11:52 PM

Right! If you get to ogg directly there is no issue. Unforutnatly for me… I had my whole collection in mp3 and wanted to switch, its something I have to deal with. Just want to let poeple know that if they cant re rip straight to ogg it may not be worth it.

WHEW!  Sorry to hear that, Conversion Box.  This is REALLY VALUABLE info.  ** Thanks for sharing it and for contributing to this ENCODER topic.**

 

Best regards,

CurlySue

You’re welcome.

:slight_smile:

The best MP3 encoder would be (IMO) LAME. LAME is used by a bunch of different front-end programs.  As someone else mentioned, gapless playback won’t be possible with other encoders.

Interesting.  I have read the same - that is, mostly, the best “free” MP3 encoder. 

If you google “Lame mp3 encoder” you should find the official website, and they have links to software that uses their encoder.

Prior to posting, I did find it and downloaded LAME 1.98.2 version from another website.

Edit:  After re-reading your edited first post, I agree with a previous poster, you should take a look at ogg vorbis for music.  What kind of material are you using?  (music, spoken word, etc?)

First, regarding material, I listen to a variety of music from the 50s thru the 90s and some of today’s artists as well.  ** My music tastes vary greatly, from Elvis to Led Zeppelin, from Lynyrd Skynyrd to Earth, Wind & Fire, from Santana to Diana Krall, from Yanni (some) to Creed, Collective Soul and Evanescence.  In short, tenzip, I like a variety of music, spoken word, etc.  :wink:**

Thanks again, tenzip, for your support and for continuing to contribute to this ENCODER topic.  :smiley:

Best regards,

CurlySue

Well . . . I have been up all night playing with MP3s - learning how to install, re-register and make the non-WMA9 encoders work within Audiograbber.  No learning required for the WMA9 encoder, with JetAudio, version 7.1.8.40006 Basic, its an imbedded or integral encoder. 

I selected a track from a CD that I know very well and compared my first two encoders, WMA9 versus both Fraunhofer IIS MPEG Layer-3 Codec [professional] 3.4.0.0 - also known as Fraunhofer IIS Pro, I believe - and LameEnc DLL Version 1.32, dated 24-09-2008, Engine 3.98 - also known as the LAME MP3 Encoder 3.98.2

 

I looked for and found the Fraunhofer encoder included with K-Lite Codec Pack 4.7.0 Full version.  The install was not entirely automatic.  In fact, I had to unregister and re-register two files, then create a new Registry Key, modify it, then modify a couple other Keys, to get Audiograbber to recognize the Professional version over the Advanced version. 

 

I wanted to try Fraunhofer IIS Pro 3.4.0.0 because its revision date is 2004, and the Fraunhofer IIS Advanced version dates to 1999.  I may be wrong here, but I want to believe 2004 Pro is the better product.  It definitely has more compression options than 1999 Advanced.  And for those of you interested, here is a link . . . www.free-codecs.com/download/K_Lite_Codec_Pack.htm

 

The 5m36s CD track was ripped at 320Kbps, 44KHz, stereo (not joint-stereo).  No additional settings were required with JetAudio.  However, with Audiograbber 1.83, under the Internal Encoder tab, I checked Encode with Highest Quality. 

 

At this time, I am favorably impressed with the Fraunhofer IIS Pro 3.4.0 encoder.  Favorably because, after listening to the same track, over and over and over again, comparing it against WMA9, unless my mind is playing tricks on me - due to limited sleep - it was no contest.  Due to its superior, however, subtle clarity and detail, Fraunhofer IIS Pro 3.4.0.0 wins - WMA9 loses. 

 

LAME 3.98.2 also loses, and loses big.  Though not specifically due to its audio quality, but also due to the fact that it rips slow - nearly 2X as long to rip the same track.  Fraunhofer IIS Pro 3.4.0 ripped my CD track in 18 seconds, and LAME 3.98.2 took 38 seconds.  After ripping ** 15 CDs, but not all tracks, 106 tracks at 4.63GB, u **sing a 22X DVD-RAM drive, ripping times included:

 

17m1s - Fraunhofer IIS Pro 3.4.0.0 - at 9.63 seconds per track

40m47s - LAME 3.98.2 - at 23.08 seconds per track

18m42s - WMA9 - at 10.58 seconds per track

 

As you can see, the 2X factor did hold up.  In fact, it was worse.  On average, LAME lagged Fraunhofer by 13.45 seconds per track, which translates to a factor of 2.40 - more than enough time for Fraunhofer to rip all 106 tracks a second time and still have 6m45s to spare.  Therefore, i** f an average CD holds 12 tracks, ripping with my 22X DVD-RAM drive and  **Fraunhofer IIS Pro 3.4.0.0 saves me 2m41s per CD. 

 

Given its superior audio quality, with my hearing and a Sansa e260 v1 player, and fast ripping capability, I am truly impressed with this Fraunhofer encoder.  The Audiograbber GUI works well too. 

** ** 

Before I close, I was wondering if any other Sansa owners have tried the Fraunhofer IIS Pro 3.4.0.0 encoder when ripping your CDs?

 

Next on the list, BladeEnc 0.94.2 and Ogg Vorbis version 2.

 

Thanks in advance for your contributions,

 

CurlySue  :slight_smile:

Message Edited by CurlySue on 03-02-2009 07:25 PM

  Hi all!  :slight_smile:

I have now listened to 4 or 5 of my newly ripped CDs.  Newly ripped with the Fraunhofer IIS 3.4.0.0 encoder, professional version, and I have to say that I was totally WRONG when I used the word “subtle” in my previous description.  ** This  endcoder, with a 28 JAN 05 creation date,  is literally BLOWING MY HEARING AWAY!!  :D  **

Thus far, this experience has been nothing less than FANTASTIC!  I am so IMPRESSED by the clarity, added detail and depth that it feels like I am listening to SACDs instead of CDs!!

This has also been a complete surprise because I would not have believed an encoder that rips FASTER would also produce such a vastly improved audio image.  The soundstage is deeper, wider and I am listening with fricken CX400 earphones!!  :D  Its simply AMAZING!!!

Smiling WIDELY,

CurlySue :smiley:

Preferred Encoder: FraunhoferL3 Codec Professional, version 3.4.0.0

Preferred Decoder: Fraunhofer L3 Codec Professional, version 3.4.0.0

Preferred GUI programs: Audiograbber 1.83, jetAudio 7.1.8.4006 Basic

Message Edited by CurlySue on 03-03-2009 09:06 AM

Exact Audio Copy to FLAC for archive -> Foobar2000 to convert to Lame mp3.

CDEX is another alternative for LAME mp3 and Vorbis; the V1.70 (beta2) also includes FLAC encoding.

Well, I finally tried Ogg Vorbis (OV) with Audiograbber.  ****Specifically, I used the embedded library file, libvorbis.dll, dated 19 JUL 02, that came with Audiograbber 1.83 and, man, was it s-l-o-w. 

 

OV ripped track 1 at less than 3X and did not get above 5X thru track 12 so I aborted the rip. 

 

I may look for a newer Ogg Vorbis release and give it a spin, but my goal is 320Kbps so that may not be time well spend - because I understand that OV is best at lower bit rates. 

 

I also gave LAME 3.98.2 another go.  ** This time, I chose VBR instead of CBR.  **The difference, speed-wise, was immediate.  First, track 1 ripped near 14X, in contrast, the same CD track ripped at under 8X at CBR.  The 2nd track ripped near 16X and the 15th at 20X plus. 

 

These speeds were a dramatic improvement over my previous experience (noted above) where LAME 3.98.2 took 2.4X a long as Fraunhofer IIS 3.4.0.0.  However, the overall VBR “speed” results are still much slower than Fraunhofer.  ****LAME peaked at 20X.  In contrast, Fraunhofer peaked at over 32X.  Since, to my ears, Fraunhofer sounds better than LAME, this speed factor is a HUGE negative for me.  

 

After ripping 15 CDs, Fraunhofer averaged 115 seconds per CD at 320Kbps CBR.  That is less than 2 minutes per CD - a seriously FAST rate, in my experience.

 

Thus far, that is my update.

 

Thanks again to everyone for your contributions to this topic.

 


CurlySue :smiley:

Preferred Encoder: FraunhoferL3 Codec Professional, version 3.4.0.0


Preferred Decoder: Fraunhofer L3 Codec Professional, version 3.4.0.0

Preferred GUI programs: Audiograbber 1.83, jetAudio 7.1.8.4006 Basic

Message Edited by CurlySue on 03-03-2009 09:17 AM