Wmp 11

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mens_sana
    Member
    Member
    • Mar 2006
    • 58

    Wmp 11

    I downloaded it and am using it to rip around 4500 CDs to my hard drive. I like it, especially the revamped Library. BUT, while WMP 10 would let me enter initial CD info or edit online info during the ripping process, WMP 11 won't. So I have to enter the info, often for a pile of tracks, THEN sit here while it rips — and it ain't ripping fast!

    Anyone have any ideas? Does anyone know how I can email the WMP 11 project about this?
    Q6600 2.4Ghz; ASUS Striker Extreme
    3GB DDR2; EVGA 8800GTS
    WD VelociRaptor 300GB C:\; 2 WD Caviar Black 1TB: F:\ & G: ; 1 Seagate 1TB 31000340AS H:\
    Samsung SH-202N & 203N
    XP Pro
    LG L226WT monitor
  • anonymez
    Super Moderator
    • Mar 2004
    • 5525

    #2
    for such a large job i wouldn't use something as crappy as wmp, let alone something in beta stages-- use CDex instead
    "What were the things in Gremlins called?" - Karl Pilkington

    Comment

    • mens_sana
      Member
      Member
      • Mar 2006
      • 58

      #3
      I have been using WMP 11 in order to rip to WMA Lossless. I wanted to get as near to the original CD quality as possible.
      Q6600 2.4Ghz; ASUS Striker Extreme
      3GB DDR2; EVGA 8800GTS
      WD VelociRaptor 300GB C:\; 2 WD Caviar Black 1TB: F:\ & G: ; 1 Seagate 1TB 31000340AS H:\
      Samsung SH-202N & 203N
      XP Pro
      LG L226WT monitor

      Comment

      • anonymez
        Super Moderator
        • Mar 2004
        • 5525

        #4
        recommend FLAC or Wavpack instead, both lossless, better compression/speed & support. i prefer FLAC.

        I wanted to get as near to the original CD quality as possible.
        lossless means perfect quality, identical to the source
        Last edited by anonymez; 27 Jul 2006, 09:45 AM.
        "What were the things in Gremlins called?" - Karl Pilkington

        Comment

        • mens_sana
          Member
          Member
          • Mar 2006
          • 58

          #5
          Thanks, I'll try FLAC and WavPack. It looks as if they might be more 'lossless' than WMA.
          Q6600 2.4Ghz; ASUS Striker Extreme
          3GB DDR2; EVGA 8800GTS
          WD VelociRaptor 300GB C:\; 2 WD Caviar Black 1TB: F:\ & G: ; 1 Seagate 1TB 31000340AS H:\
          Samsung SH-202N & 203N
          XP Pro
          LG L226WT monitor

          Comment

          • celtic_druid
            Digital Video Expert
            Digital Video Expert
            • Dec 2005
            • 514

            #6
            Lossless is lossless. It either is or it isn't. Although WavPack can do hybrid where you have a lossy file and a correction file. Combine the two and you have lossless, with just the lossy file you have a smaller file that given a high enough bitrate is still transparent.

            Comment

            Working...