Question about MP3 encoding

[maja_the_bee]

Hallo!

I use CDex for CD ripping & converting to MP3.
And i am wondering, is there any difference (in quality) between 'on the fly' encoding or first extracting to .wav and then encode to mp3?

Sorry for my bad English.

Thanks

[jimmalenko]

Given your PC specs, unless you've got a really ancient CD-ROM, I don't think it would make any difference either way. I guess you could always try it and make up your own decision ?

It is you that will be listening to them, after all

[celtic_druid]

Unless the setting lowers the ripping quality to increase speed (never used CDex) then I can't see how it would make any difference even with an ancient CD-ROM. One you are creating a wav, the other you are piping the pcm directly to the mp3 encoder.

[jimmalenko]

In the past (Like, 2001 or something), I used CDEX with an ancient CD-ROM (16X IIRC). On the fly results were generally horrible, as the CD-ROM couldn't supply the data to the MP3 encoder quick enough, and it was much like dropped frames when capping video. There were also a number of clicks, pops etc etc in the MP3s as well. Yet extracting to WAV with CDEX, then encoding the WAVs to MP3 with CDEX produced flawless results.

[celtic_druid]

No reason (unlike capture) why it should need to be realtime though. If the drive can't supply the data realtime then it would just take longer than realtime to encode.

16X isn't ancient. I had a 1X external back in the day.

[jimmalenko]

No reason (unlike capture) why it should need to be realtime though. If the drive can't supply the data realtime then it would just take longer than realtime to encode.

16X isn't ancient. I had a 1X external back in the day.

Just quoting my experiences with the program


16X is/was ancient considering they maxed out at 52X some time around late 2001 / early 2002.

[Cornucopia]

"ALL's I KNOW" is that I use EAC, rip to wav, then batch convert with lame to mp3 (when I need to), they sound great!

Scott