CDex vs EAC

**ferrarimodena360** · February 19th, 2004, 10:40 AM

okies just limit your discussions to these 2 only, i know there are others, well dime a dozen...

which1 1 is better and why

**collideous** · February 19th, 2004, 11:03 AM

Personally I prefer CDex. It's plain and simple and works right "out of the box".

I had tried EAC once, and only got it to do anything if "error correction" was turned off.

**Killawat** · February 19th, 2004, 08:31 PM

CDex , I had been using that for all my ripping needs back in the day, But nero serves my needs now.Simplicity is also a factor.

**eivioolla** · February 19th, 2004, 09:06 PM

EAC is the standard in ripping scene. If you want error-free quality rips, that is your choice.

**serrebi101** · February 19th, 2004, 09:08 PM

CDex has worked wonders for me, but lately I've been using winamp (I know I know) but it does all the Id3 tags for me, and it doesn't always force me to ripp at 128kbps like CDex did!

**RJ5500** · February 19th, 2004, 09:18 PM

I personally prefer EAC.

It is fast, integrates with the LAME encoder, and has worked great for me many times in the past.

EAC is the best, IMO.

**ferrarimodena360** · February 19th, 2004, 09:44 PM

i personally have been using cdex, though i tried EAC , when they did not have an installer, i couldnt figure out how to go from Secure Mode (vbr) to CBR...

any quality difference in both???
CDex has LAME 3.92 MMX

**simian** · February 19th, 2004, 09:54 PM

This has been discussed over at ==> Hydrogen Audio <==

Conclusion: EAC! :gj

I have been on the eac/lame bandwagon for over a year now and it hasn't failed me yet. Secure mode with alt-preset-extreme(or insane) makes rips indistinguishable from cds imho.

**rebirth** · February 20th, 2004, 01:16 AM

I have CDs to rip...but why clutter up my HDD? That's the way I see it

I have 256 CDs of Legal Audio CDs from 2001 and b4...so...why waste HDD space...the end............................................... ..........or is it?

Nope....

Also...uuuuuhhhhh...I forgot...SHITE!!!!! Oh well, forgetit

**DainBramaged** · February 20th, 2004, 01:16 AM

Simian, with a certain degree of certainty, you probably couldn't ABX an --alt preset standard encoding to the original, much less extreme or insane. Everything else is placebo. But hey, whatever sounds best to your ears man.

CDex is very straightforward and requires little reading or know-how to get working fairly quickly. With some configuration it only becomes more powerful.

EAC, however, is the way to go. Specially designed error detection algorithms, secure ripping mode, and super configurability make it the winner. There are plenty of tutorials, guides, web pages, etc devoted to getting EAC going.

**rebirth** · February 20th, 2004, 01:19 AM

...And I don't wanna be lectured about having a hard copy...cuz a fucking file in a fucking lossy format isn't a fucking hard copy...only reply if you are and intellectual...at least SEMI-normal human being...tho....I dunno ...some of us here are odd....*cough* ME *cough*

**nasrules** · February 20th, 2004, 01:24 AM

I was a big fan of CDex until I discovered EAC and Uberstandard. You may not think that there's a major difference between 192Kbps CBR MP3 and average 192Kbps VBR Uberstandard MP3, but there can be a world of difference between the two.

**ferrarimodena360** · February 20th, 2004, 01:34 AM

i read that hydrogen post, comon cdex aint that bad...

With the Memorex DVD-Maxx 1648 drive, CDex is of no use compared to EAC, it returns files full of errors and audible clicks claiming zero errors occured even in full paranoia mode.