johnmcelfresh,

I agree with most of your points.

But I'm completely convinced EAC with Accurate Rip does a "better" job. Now can you actually hear that it did a better job I doubt it.

I ripped half my library with Windows Media player using lossless WMA with error correction on (I believe is a similar level you used in ITunes). I decided to learn EAC after finding out WMA lossless was not Native to SqueezeBox. After understanding it I reripped everything. I found several CD's that should not of ripped cleanly did using Windows Media Player. After it stated it found errors I did notice junk on most of these CD's and cleaned them then they ripped error free most of the time.

Also calibrated my drive using Accurate Rip. I also learned that one drive was although much slower (a DVD drive) was much more reliable of getting checksum matches in the database than my other drive (CD drive).

So if anything, Eac calibrated my drive correctly, taught me which drive was best and pointed out which CD's were dirty or scratched beyond repair. With Windows Media Player it was just happy to Rip in bliss (with Error correction on).

Now like I said, can you actaully hear the difference I really doubt it but I feel much more confident that I ripped as best I could with EAC.

Once I figured EAC out it was just as fast as ripping as any other tool. You could throttle back how Neurotic you wanted, but if in non Neurotic modes (that run faster) it would still compare checksums in the database. So you know if you got a good rip and decide if it was worth ripping more Neurotically.

Please please let's not get into Apple vs Microsoft debate. It a discussion of Ripping with Neurotic tools like EAC and what not vs. standard tools like ITunes Windows Media Player etc.

- Fiddler (IMHO)

If you think listening to music is fun, try learning an instrument.
HT: G61RSL, 4x5K, 5.5KHC, 2xSC6000, Transporter, HD621, Philips BDP7501 4K, Tivo, 65" LG OLED 4K C6
Computer: Foobar2000, 5K, Mojo, HiFiMan HE1000 V2