RE: Lower Lower Price on DDAR

["Paul Gordon" <paul_gordon@xxxxxxx>]

Tim,


>
>1. URL?

www.xingtech.com
>
>2. What do the assembled fraternity think of this as an alternative to
LAME
>(which from the limited reading I have done came across as the dog's
nads)?
>
>Tim.

I've used Audiocatalyst 2.1 exclusively for ripping over the last couple of
years, and have been pretty much happy with it, hence the reason I've stuck
with it for so long.

I don't have audiophile ears or equipment, but I DO demand a certain level
of quality, below which I cannot stand, above which I am satisfied.

>From what I have been able to gather from various people's comments,
the
Xing encoder in Audiocatalyst is generally regarded as one of the fastest,
but far from being one of the best.

However, like I said, I've been satisfied enough with the results so far,
and even if I were to try a different encoder, and could tell a difference,
I'll be damned if I'm going to rip my entire CD collection all over again!!
- It took 3 months last time!

HTH.

Paul G.

>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dr John Tankard [mailto:john@xxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 02 April 2001 10:02
> > To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Lower Lower Price on DDAR
> >
> >
> >
> > > Now will someone answer my original question? Will I get a
> > better results
> > > from using a separate ripper or will using the CDex front
end
> > to LAME give
> > > good results.
> > >
> >
> > I dont use either, Audio Catalyst 2.1 set for variable rate,
reference
> > quality
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
>

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.