Ripped .wav file levels

  • Thread starter Thread starter muzeman
  • Start date Start date
muzeman

muzeman

New member
Hi,

I just downloaded a free ripper,when I rip a wav file from a cd,the wav file level is much lower than the playback level from the cd.
I raised all the playback and the recording levels in Windows audio mixer,still the same thing.

I had the same problem with another ripper,am I missing something in the Windows system?

Anybody have any suggestions?

BTW-The free ripper is actually shareware,but fully functional except you can't burn cds with it unless you pay $20.
Seems to work well so far,the sound is good,and it dosn't take over any other files or applications.

The mp3 conversion sucks though!

Here's the link if anybodys interested-

http://www.cdcopy.sk/

Thanks,
Pete
 
It's probably that you're playing the CD "normally", which means that the DA conversion is taking place in the CD drive itself, and an analog signal is being sent to your soundcard. This analog signal may be a little high, and your soundcard might be amplifying it as well.

When you play the .wav, you're using your soundcard to do the DA conversion.

If you have Media Player 7 installed, look for an option called "Digital Audio Extraction" or something similar. Checking this option will cause media player to play the CD digitally (e.g. data is copied from the CD and the soundcard does the conversion), just like playing a .wav. I'm willing to bet that the levels will match up after you select this option.

I haven't used it in a while, but a good ripper once was:

http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/

Slackmaster 2000
 
Thanks very much for the help,good info to know!

I can't use the 7 version yet,I still have Windows 95.

I'll definatly check out that ripper.

Best to you,
Pete
 
I downloaded the ripper,works much better,thanks.

I'm using the Scmpx encoder for mp3's.

I'm not sure what software it uses.

Seems like the exactaudiocopy software likes Lame.
Do you think I'd be better off finding a Lame software somewhere
and using that instead?

Thanks for your help.

Best to you,
Pete
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top