Is there a simple difference between Audiograbber and AudioCatalyst ? I am keen to use LAME and do my encoding right first time ( at pretty high quality ). Grab is 25usd Cat is 30usd, Grab appears to offer free updates to registered users, so Audiograbber has my attention right now, but many people here appear to use AudioCataylst ?

- --
Rod, UK Mk2 18gig Red S/No.341

Audiograbber is the codec used by Audiocatalyst.

DiGNAN

I use audiocatalyst, after testing quite a few windows based programs.... I've used it to take in about 24Gb data so far with very few erros, and the errors that do exist seem to be caused by it trying to work around scratches on the CD's

-------------
MK II, (Blue but should be Amber) SN: 118

Audiograbber is the front end that Xing have licensed to put over the top of their less than perfect MP3 encoder.

Or, to put it another way, AudioCatalyst is Audiograbber with the Xing MP3 encoder bundled (and sold by Xing).

If you are at all interested in getting good quality, artifact free MP3 files, then give AudioCatalyst a miss. The Xing MP3 encoder is terrible, getting worse as the bitrate rises (yes, I know, sad isn't it!).

The best bit of AudioCatalyst is the Audiograbber front end. Do yourself a favour, and use Audiograbber with the Lame 3.87 DLL.

For more info on how bad Xing really is, take a look at:

http://r3mix.net

Andy.

Edited by Bagpuss on 15/10/00 08:48 PM.

what settings are you using with lame, and how big are the files? Ive tried lame, and it does sound better, but the files are very large. Any suggestions?

Empeg 12 gig green 080000078

what settings are you using with lame, and how big are the files? Ive tried lame, and it does sound better, but the files are very large. Any suggestions?

The file size almost entirely depends on the bitrate you choose and should be the same with every encoder. I usually run lame with

lame -V 3 -b 128 -mj -h

This works out as about 160kbps on average (variable bitrate, so it sounds better than 160kbps constant bitrate).

Borislav

I am keen to use LAME and do my encoding right first time ( at pretty high quality ). Grab is 25usd Cat is 30usd...

Exact Audio Copy http://www.exactaudiocopy.de

Does error correction like cdparanoia, and can use Lame to encode (though you need to install Lame separately).

EAC is postcardware so costs very nearly 0usd.

Peter

Are you implying you could also use AudioCat with the Lame encoder DLL in place of the Xing encoder?

One of the few remaining Mk1 owners... #00015

Close... If you want the functionality of AudioCatalyst but with the ability to use whatever encoder you want, then use AudioGRABBER and the the encoder (ie. LAME).

This is how I am ripping CD's, after much evaluating of various rippers/encoders. Overall it's the best compromise that I have come across -- rips the .wav file quickly and without any problems, and then does a quality encode.

However, in order to rip a whole CD you must purchase AudioGrabber. If you don't have the ability to do this right now, my second choice would be CDDA.

I have tried several different MP3 encoding / CD-ripping prog.s So far, this is the one that has worked best for me.
It seems to be the fastest, and most reliable. And, it can use any codec you have installed. I am using a fairly old version of the prog., and haven't even taken the time to check if there is a newer version than what I have, but it keeps working.

I use WinDAC with the newest Fraunhofer codec.

I am curious to know if anyone has compared this proggie to the others out there.

(just my 2 cents).

I have a certain disk drive that WinDac32 is the only ripper that'll work with it, and I've tried several. AC chokes on it, EAC goes too slow on it, etc. WinDac32 is a great ripper for that particular disk drive.

___________
Tony Fabris

Hi,

I use abcde (with cd-discid, wget, id3, cdparanoia and lame).

Works great.

lame settings are: -v -h -b64 -B192
(i.e. Vbr, High quality, bitrate from 64 to 192)
Works out at around 128kbps but sounds so much better than fixed rate.

just my 2 pennies
anti

Yeah, Audio Catalyst is a licensed version of AudioGrabber. Give your money to the source, buy AudioGrabber. Has better, newer features anyway. I am using it along with Fraunhofer at 192kb/s with "Real" stereo, meaning each channel is encoded separately. I just finished re-encoding my entire collection. Previously I used MusicMatch, which even at 192 will eliminate some of the stereo info. It sounded awful. The thing is that when music is recorded, a phasing on the channels is often used to create the stereo effect. When you remove this information, you get a flanging or chorus type effect that wasn't intended in the original recording. Couldn't stand it.

I've been using AudioGrabber togther with Lame.exe and have been happy with it so far. I have Lame set to VBR (the 3rd from the highest setting) and have a minimum bitrate of 128. This was able to pass my stereo test, using a clip from a Pink Floyd song. Overall, it creates files around 160, but will spike as far up as 320 when needed.

Befire this, I was using the Xing encoder on CBR 192. Found that still created a few issues, and made bigger files.

I was using audiocatalyst before, but have since switched to audiograbber w/ the lame plugin..
-mark

MK2: 36gb
Tivo: 90gb
CPU: 120gb
...I think drive manufacturers love me!