Does MP3val ever fix anything?

[ScrewUpgrading]

So I'm using CDex 1.40 because I'm awesome and it's one of the FEW rippers that doesn't crash Windows ME.

I set it for "VBR Default Quality 4", bla bla bla, which usually makes good-sounding, smaller files at around 166 ~ 177 kbps. To me, that's a pretty good ratio of quality/size. The other few programs either don't support VBR, thus they create huge files, or else they don't allow me to rename the files to my liking. Lame. CDex 1.40 is pretty rad, that's why I've been using it since 2000.

Only problem is "MP3val" says every single file I rip has a "problem." These files work on every mp3 player though and burning program.

So, is MP3val just some fear-mongering B.S. program or what?!?!?

If I have any MP3s that absolutely don't play, I can usually fix them by converting to WAV then back to MP3. Problem solved.

I got a ripper that is versatile enough and simple enough to adjust the plethora of settings, yet all the files need fixing?. Lame.

Any other MP3Val haters?

Edited December 8, 2011 by ScrewUpgrading

[loblo]

Mp3val finds no problems with my 320kbps CBR Mp3s, all ripped directly to Mp3 with CDEX 1.70b2.

Your version of CDex is very old and so must be the bundled lame encoding dll which might not output files fully complying to the mp3 standard. There has been lots of bugfixes and improvements in lame since 2000.

Anyway mp3val should let you know what the problem is that it finds with your files, which is?

Edited December 8, 2011 by loblo

[ScrewUpgrading]

Here's exactly what it says:

Analyzing file "C:\My Documents\MP3\John Denver - Take me Home, Country Roads.mp3"...

WARNING: "C:\My Documents\MP3\John Denver - Take me Home, Country Roads.mp3": Wrong number of MPEG data bytes specified in Xing header (4384368 instead of 4382320)

INFO: "C:\My Documents\MP3\John Denver - Take me Home, Country Roads.mp3": 7339 MPEG frames (MPEG 1 Layer III), +ID3v2, Xing header

Done!

Rebuilding file "C:\My Documents\MP3\John Denver - Take me Home, Country Roads.mp3"...

FIXED: "C:\My Documents\MP3\John Denver - Take me Home, Country Roads.mp3": File was rebuilt

Done!

]

Thanks for replying, Loblo.

So it's just an old version of the lame encoder with cdex, then?

Edited December 8, 2011 by ScrewUpgrading

[loblo]

So it's just an old version of the lame encoder with cdex, then?

Perhaps...

[Arminius]

The other few programs either don't support VBR, thus they create huge files,

VBR files are always a pain in the backside. OK for four minute songs perhaps but VBR files tend to be more temperamental than CBR. How much bigger are your CBR files over VBR files? Like maybe 10%?

or else they don't allow me to rename the files to my liking.

I use the 1by1 window to rename files.

Only problem is "MP3val" says every single file I rip has a "problem." These files work on every mp3 player though and burning program.

So, is MP3val just some fear-mongering B.S. program or what?!?!?

MP3val may just be a buggy app that is more trouble than it is worth. I have never used it.

If I have any MP3s that absolutely don't play, I can usually fix them by converting to WAV then back to MP3. Problem solved.

By re-encoding mp3's you are negating your attempt to producing high quality sound files. The only time I have come across mp3s that didn't play it always was due to bad ID3v2 tags. Removing the tag fixed the problem.

I got a ripper that is versatile enough and simple enough to adjust the plethora of settings, yet all the files need fixing?. Lame.

Which version of Lame? Some people swear that Lame 3.93 was the best version ever produced. Or maybe you need to try different compilations of the newer versions of Lame, some don't work on 9x, others do. Some might just be buggy on 9x.

I mainly rip audiobook CDs therefore find 80kbps mono CBR optimal. Fraunhofer has proved itself to be the better codec at that bitrate. Depending on the source CD I have found that recent versions of Lame try to "encode too much data" resulting in sound artifacts in the mp3 which were not present in the original wave file and have a gravelly sound when played back.

I have CDex 1.40, 1.70b2, as well as Audiograbber 1.83 installed on my system and I don't use ANY of them to rip CDs. I prefer CDFS.VXD instead, the one that displays audiotracks as wav files in Windows Explorer.

Then there is the question of what kind of ROM drive do you use to rip your CDs? Most people have DVD or DVD combo drives as their primary drive. In my experience some DVD or DVD combo drives don't read CDs very well at all and can cause a BSOD. They can't get the job done and choke. On the other hand CD-RW drives do the best job reading CDs IMO.

[Kelsenellenelvian]

ScrewUpgrading has decided to commit e-suicide so i guess this is all a moot point now...

Edited December 9, 2011 by Kelsenellenelvian

[larryb123456]

Maybe e-suicide, but the pink tutu will live on, firmly embedded in my brain. Fortunately(?) or unfortunately(?). I'll never tell. (lol)

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Looks like the avatar (with the pink tutu) is a clip from the first Ace Ventura movie, when he gets committed to a sanitarium.

Just sayin'.

[larryb123456]

You are correct. (I just had to check it out -- "Pet Detective", 1994.)

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3600779008/tt0109040

"Crazy Dance" video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1MM4aNZMZY&feature=endscreen&NR=1

I've seen the movie 2 or 3 times, but somehow I didn't remember the "very fashionable" pink tutu. (?)(?)

Edited December 12, 2011 by larryb123456

[ScrewUpgrading]

Sorry to be flakey, but I changed my mind. I'm back from my Hobbit Hole, this place it too tempting. But Gmail still sucks!

Okay.

CDex 1.40 uses "Lame Encoder 1.27, engine 3.92 Alpha." And as somebody already mentioned is quite old. (The program itself is copyrighted 2001).

VBR files are always a pain in the backside. OK for four minute songs perhaps but VBR files tend to be more temperamental than CBR. How much bigger are your CBR files over VBR files? Like maybe 10%?

The VBR encoded files are about 1 megabyte smaller than CBR, if you're talking about creating files in the 160kpbs ~ 190kbps range.

I use the 1by1 window to rename files.

I use that to fix the tags. But for ripping the actual mp3, I like how CDex allows you to specify the directory and filename format string (%1 %2 %3 %4 %G %Y %A, etc

etc).

MP3val may just be a buggy app that is more trouble than it is worth. I have never used it.

Well, MP3val doesn't like any of the files from "Deep Ripper" either.

Cdex 1.40 = bad

Deep Ripper = bad

CD Ripper Freeware by WordAddin = Good !

I have CDex 1.40, 1.70b2, as well as Audiograbber 1.83 installed on my system and I don't use ANY of them to rip CDs.

I tried Audiograbber, it was okay. But it only lets you create 56kbps MP3s.

On the other hand CD-RW drives do the best job reading CDs IMO.

I have a CD-RW.

ScrewUpgrading has decided to commit e-suicide so i guess this is all a moot point now...

I tried, but I have nothing else to do, and this is like a nice support group for Windows 9x enthusiasts. I read two books in the last couple days. I don't have a TV with channels, only my old VHS tapes and DVD's. And those are boring. I can only watch so much Terminator before I get bored of it.

Maybe e-suicide, but the pink tutu will live on, firmly embedded in my brain. Fortunately(?) or unfortunately(?). I'll never tell. (lol)

I found it at "God Like Productions". They have all sorts of goofy pics over there.

My user name there is "Son of Coelacanth", but I never post anything. Only lurking.

Looks like the avatar (with the pink tutu) is a clip from the first Ace Ventura movie, when he gets committed to a sanitarium.

Just sayin'.

I thought the Truman Show was better.

Now that was a masterpiece.

Edited December 13, 2011 by ScrewUpgrading

[Arminius]

But Gmail still sucks!

A friend of mine also had trouble with Gmail. Give Yahoo a try.

CDex 1.40 uses "Lame Encoder 1.27, engine 3.92 Alpha." And as somebody already mentioned is quite old. (The program itself is copyrighted 2001).

I can tell from your reply that you are either a novice at making mp3s or you never read the help files that came with either CDex or Audiograbber. CDex 1.40 isn't limited to Lame 3.92 Alpha. You can give it a newer version of Lame by copying the newer lame_enc.dll into the CDex installation directory. When CDex was still under development the developer would include whatever the latest version of Lame happened to be.

You can screw upgrading your OS if you want but it doesn't mean you have to screw upgrading your CDex installation.

Well, MP3val doesn't like any of the files from "Deep Ripper" either.

There you go. Don't bother using MP3val. It sounds like a buggy piece of junk.

I tried Audiograbber, it was okay. But it only lets you create 56kbps MP3s.

This is what I mean about you never having read the help files for Audiograbber. Audiograbber will give you a full range of bitrates but you have to supply the codecs.

If you only get the option for 56kbps mp3s this is because the only codec Audiograbber has available is the "advanced" version of Fraunhofer, L3codeca.acm. This shipped with WMP 7 and 9. What you need is the professional version L3codecp.acm that shipped with WMP 10. You can find a standalone installer for this codec on MDGx's site.

Audiograbber supports a whole host of codecs. If you want to use Lame with Audiograbber then copy lame_enc.dll into the Audiograbber installation directory where the program can find it.

The only thing you have to look out for is that some of the latest official versions of Lame no longer worked under 9x. It had something to do with the compiler that was used. Fortunately there are alternate compilations that DO work under 9x.

[ScrewUpgrading]

MP3val is nothing more than a fear-mongering hack program, written by a hack.

OOooohh, the Xing header doesn't match.... give me a break. More like it doesn't recognize older headers and has crap backwards compatibility with older versions of LAME. It's almost a scare tactic worthy of Microsoft. Upgrade, Upgrade, Upgrade! Your Xing headers don't match! Suckers.

MP3val is close to being about as worthless as most Registry Cleaners, they both provide the user with a false sense of "security," but nothing else.

Edited December 14, 2011 by ScrewUpgrading