Windows Media Player

EdE · #1 09-01-2006, 10:39 PM

Ok stupid question. On my old computer, I used WMP to rip CD's to MP3 and created a library. When it would rip the files, it would automatically put in track name, artist name, album name.
I get a new computer with WMP 10. But when I go to rip a CD, it doesnt automatically put all the details on the file. I dont know what I am missing. I have the retrieve information from internet box checked but dont know what else to do. Any ideas??

Thanks!

**Ayrton** · #2 09-01-2006, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdE

Any ideas??

Thanks!

Yes, stop using WMP for anything related to audio.

Exact Audio Copy is the only program to use.

Follow this guide and you will be very very happy.

www.bestmp3guide.com

**jemsite** · #3 09-02-2006, 12:13 AM

should work great.. i'd recomment WMP11 beta2. i rip to WMA-lossless only and everything is automated. when you go to rip, it should show the album cover and track names, assuming the CD is legit (not made from mp3s)... glen

EdE · #4 09-02-2006, 09:04 PM

I was actually trying to rip my daughters CD so she could put it on the MP3 player she has. I have all the settings the same as the other computer. I wonder if it is because it is on the wireless computer and it is just being slow. I will try the WMP11 beta 2.

Dee · #5 09-11-2006, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ayrton

Yes, stop using WMP for anything related to audio.

Exact Audio Copy is the only program to use.

Follow this guide and you will be very very happy.

www.bestmp3guide.com

Yep. EAC is the only software I have used for about 4 years. It is the standard. Forget WMP, it's a piece of bloated junk.

Actually, foobar2000 is decent for ripping too, but it ain't no EAC. foobar2000 is still my favourite audio player, though. Deceptively plain looking (no flashing lights or graphics-heavy skins here, thank you), but very versatile and flexible.

**Ayrton** · #6 09-11-2006, 01:56 AM

Foobar is hands down the best sounding player, but the learning curve is steep. I had to mess with it for about a month before I got it where I liked it. I run Foobar thru a EMU 0404 soundcard to my Altec Lansing MX501 speakers.

Gex · #7 09-11-2006, 02:02 AM

Could somebody explain to me whats so bad about Windows media player?

I hear it all the time, but I dont understand whats bad about it.

**jemsite** · #8 09-11-2006, 09:43 AM

WMP gets a bad rap for no real reason. 11 beta is excellent.

WMA-lossless is almost a no-brainer... best format (no data loss from CD) and very compatible with small devices and home devices (streaming) and phones (WMP downconverts for mobile devices to lower res WMA files).

now, if you're stuck using MP3s then WMP probably can be beaten with LAME (even though you need a player now) and if you're on an iPod you're limited to iTunes for ACC if you value quality but there are many good reasons to use WMP i have found... glen

**jim777** · #9 09-11-2006, 11:17 AM

The lossless wma's sound fantastic in the car!

I always use WMP and have for years, but then I don't go out of my way to find alternatives to MS software either.

Lefty Robb · #10 09-11-2006, 11:22 AM

I've ripped my entire CD collection to my computer using WMP and never ever had a problem with it, and the music sounds great (ripped at the highest bitrate) especially for something thats free.

Mr.WizardNeck · #11 09-11-2006, 11:42 AM

I never use WMP for anything other than video. It doesnt even have a good random play. Not even 50 songs played and it repeats all the songs in the same order again. 50 out of 1500? That doesnt make sense. Beautiful day out. Phill's gonna go get some sun.

**Ayrton** · #12 09-11-2006, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jemsite

if you're on an iPod you're limited to iTunes for ACC if you value quality

Glen, I use an ipod with my own MP3 files, but I use www.ephpod.com to transfer files. EphPod will allow you to transfer file to and from the ipod.

What is wrong with WMP is the quality that it creates when it rips the original disc. The difference is very evident when compared to the same file ripped with Exact Audio Copy. If you are happy with WMP, then use it, but if you want the best possible copy, then use EAC.

**jemsite** · #13 09-11-2006, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ayrton

Glen, I use an ipod with my own MP3 files, but I use www.ephpod.com to transfer files. EphPod will allow you to transfer file to and from the ipod.

What is wrong with WMP is the quality that it creates when it rips the original disc. The difference is very evident when compared to the same file ripped with Exact Audio Copy. If you are happy with WMP, then use it, but if you want the best possible copy, then use EAC.

to clarify.... i don't use mp3 on my nano as the quality is horrendous at a bloated size. unfortunately ipods don't/wont support the superior WMA so i use iTunes to encode to AAC 128 (same quality roughly of 192 mp3s which are meh).

wma-lossless vs eac vs wmp11-wav-lossless would yield identical results of course - unless you introduce listener bias. mathematically lossless is mathematically lossless and streaming digital audio is streaming digital audio. if you're going to MP3 then you want LAME and the encoding is more important than the streaming of a digital bitstream. i know people think $1k cables make their CDs sound better but that is listener bias and wishful thinking that creates a false reality.... ie. pay enough or believe enough and your mind says it's true... as always YMMV... glen

**Ayrton** · #14 09-11-2006, 11:16 PM

Glen, yes lossless is lossless, but the beauty of EAC is that is does not skip anything on the disc. You actually get a bit for bit copy.

EAC is free if you want to give it a try.

microdmitry · #15 09-13-2006, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jemsite

WMP gets a bad rap for no real reason. 11 beta is excellent.

WMA-lossless is almost a no-brainer... best format (no data loss from CD) and very compatible with small devices and home devices (streaming) and phones (WMP downconverts for mobile devices to lower res WMA files).

now, if you're stuck using MP3s then WMP probably can be beaten with LAME (even though you need a player now) and if you're on an iPod you're limited to iTunes for ACC if you value quality but there are many good reasons to use WMP i have found... glen

It gets bad rap for a good reason. It has poor usability, poor UI design and its sync features leave a lot to be desired.

Also, AAC is no longer the only choice with iTunes. There's also Apple Lossless. In fact it appeared in iTunes before WMA Lossless appeared in WMP.

iTunes UI is kind of sluggish, but it's very well thought out once you get used to search functionality.