hugerobot Posted June 8, 2003 Report Share Posted June 8, 2003 Today, my 10 year old son took his first step to becoming a man.... He asked me for a Beastie Boys mixed cd!! Anyway... I went to rip some of my Beastie Boys cds that weren't already ripped, and Grip seemed REALLY SLOW... practically real-time. Thats crazy. What is everyone here using for ripping cds? (Not command line), or, what can I do to speed up the ripping? The encoding to ogg is fast, just the ripping is slow. Thanks Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtweidmann Posted June 8, 2003 Report Share Posted June 8, 2003 Either Grip, or Konqueror. If you open up Konqueror and select the Services button from the Side-Bar you should see a CD slave option. Assuming there is an audio CD in the drive it should show you all the tracks. You can simply drag and drop the OGG files into another directory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkelve Posted June 9, 2003 Report Share Posted June 9, 2003 Hi, On my machine, ripping is slow too. But it is very processor intensive, so you should probably rip some CD's when you haven't got anything else to do on your system. I mean, just be cautious not to run too many resource-intensive programs all at once (e.g. Grip + XMMS + Mplayer + OpenOffice). Darkelve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugerobot Posted June 9, 2003 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2003 Thanks for your help! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMage Posted June 9, 2003 Report Share Posted June 9, 2003 Define slow. :?: Anyway, no matter how fast my cdrom device is, grip usually only rips at 4x - 6x speed if I am lucky. It think it's the limitation of the ide ripping convention or something. Also remember that when you rip and encode (to mp3 for example) it will take quite a while because it's very processor intensive (go to 100% cpu level always) because they are done at the same time. Audiogalaxy in windows uses a different method, they rip one track, encode one track, rip another track, encode another track, and so on.. so it's serial in nature, while grip does things in parallel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michel Posted June 9, 2003 Report Share Posted June 9, 2003 believe you can make grip first rip and teh encode.....it's an option... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowator Posted June 11, 2003 Report Share Posted June 11, 2003 Firstly is it just the extraction to wav thats slow or the actual rip to MP3 If its the latter then a different encoder might be better? Have you tried recomiling the encoder (LAME/....) for your processor. I'm not sure if this will help but possibly some MM processor functions aren't being enabled. Try benchmarking your CD and disk as well. If you have a reasonalbe amount of memory then you can just use time cp <largefile> /tmp largefile should be no more than 1/4 of the size of free mempry to prevent swapping. This should give a figure for reads. time cp /tmp/<largefile> /<differentname> Disk writes. Or you can do the job properly but this should give a ballpark. Did you add the IDE tuning in lilo??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarah31 Posted June 11, 2003 Report Share Posted June 11, 2003 if there are packages for the app rip i recommend it. it is a commandline ripper but very fast and easy to use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyme Posted June 11, 2003 Report Share Posted June 11, 2003 if there are packages for the app rip i recommend it. it is a commandline ripper but very fast and easy to use. there seems to be RPMs for ripenc (is this the same tool?) which are in cooker... http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/cooker/contr...1-3mdk.i586.htm (a few months old-but doesn't seem to have made it to contrib or onto the 9.1 cds) the homepage for it: http://home.kc.rr.com/ripenc/index.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarah31 Posted June 11, 2003 Report Share Posted June 11, 2003 no the version number is too high.... rip homepage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulSe Posted June 12, 2003 Report Share Posted June 12, 2003 You can also try and make sure your cdrom is configured properly. If your cdrom's specs aren't defined specifically, paranoia will use a default read command which, while slow, will work on most cdrom drives. There are several MMCs available, try all of them until you find one that works and is fast. Some of them will look like they are ripping but will provide you with empty files. Congrats on your son's fine taste in music :wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Read_Icculus Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 If you want to just make a mix CD and not an mp3 disc then I'd recommend just using "cdparanoia -B" from the command line on the discs you want to rip. You'll get .wav files instead of mp3's and save yourself some time that you would've spent encoding to mp3. Then you can burn the .wav file to a CD right away, and you won't lose any sound quality in the process. Cdparanoia by default will make a near-perfect copy of a disc. Whereas most ripppers can toss out chunks of audio data like it's trash. If you're going to hook the kid up with tunes you might as well make them the best quality possible. Personally I don't like the sound of mp3s that are encoded below 320 kbps. IMO lossless encoding is far superior to the mp3 format. Of course if you made the CDs from mp3s in the first place then that isn't really a factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugerobot Posted June 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 If you want to just make a mix CD and not an mp3 disc then I'd recommend just using "cdparanoia -B"... I rip all of my cd's to my pc, which is why I ripped them. Personally I don't like the sound of mp3s that are encoded below 320 kbps. IMO lossless encoding is far superior to the mp3 format. I never said I was encoding them to MP3. I encode them to OGG... I can't tell the difference between a high quality OGG file and a WAV file. Of course if you made the CDs from mp3s in the first place then that isn't really a factor. I don't download music illegally. I own the original CD for every song on my computer. There were an awful lot of assumptions in your message, Read_Icculus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowator Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 We don't all have perfect musical ears !!! Actually quite a few friends who are prof musicians don't like it either but convenience is a big factor too. No music vs some music at (at least better than audio tape quality) You can argue CD audio is lossy too. Stick with vinyl . BUT: I can get 100's of albums on my MP3 player, well thousands actually and I prefer that to carrying a record player and amp around:: Sorry tongue in cheek. Your right, its just a matter of convenience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Read_Icculus Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 Yikes... sorry if I offended you. I didn't mean to imply that if you had mp3s that you got them illicitly. I was just trying to help and whatnot and give you my own audiophile opinion on lossy versus lossless compression and wavs. Sorry also for thinking that you were going to encode to mp3, I didn't read your post too carefully and I had heard grip could encode to mp3 after ripping and I didn't know it could encode to ogg. Although I guess I should've realized that "hey this is linux, ogg is everywhere". I think if you already have used cdparanoia on your discs like I said, (?), you could make a mix CD in any of your burning programs without bothering with any type of encoding as your wav files will make a higher quality CD than would the ogg files. So if you are backing up all of your discs to ogg I'd use the wav files to burn the discs before I encode them, just IMHO. But if you've already got oggs of all your other discs that you're going to be burning the mix CD with then I wouldn't see the point in using the wavs as you've got most the stuff in one format and you might as well use the ssame format across the board. Personally I like FLAC, but that's just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.