Final Follow Up Note--Ripping with iTunes v1.1

1999–2004March 5, 2001Macs Only!Mac OS
Yesterday we tried ripping all the tracks on a half dozen CDs chosen at random from our collection. Our G4 Cube 450 ripped all of them faster than the test track that we used in our note posted Thursday. The rip rate displayed by iTunes ranged from 4.8x to 6.0x which is about what we expected given the rip rates for the other computers. We then ripped the 6.0x track, a 243 second "Piano Concerto in G Major" by Maurice Ravel (don't ask), with iTunes on each computer as tabled below:

Computer Total Rip Time in Seconds Rip Rate (Displayed) Rip Rate (Calculated)
Power Mac 7300 G3/400
89
2.9x
2.7x
PowerBook 2000 (FW)/400
86
2.8x
2.8x
Power Mac G3 B&W 450
74
3.7x
3.3x
G4 Cube 450
43
6.0x
5.7x
Power Mac G4 533DP
32
8.0x
7.6x

In this set of rips, the displayed rip rate for the PowerBook is a bit out of line. However, not the rip time and calculated rip rate, the song time divided by the total rip time. The calculated rip rate is low because preparation time is included in the total time. We also ripped all the tracks on the half dozen CDs with our new Power Mac G4 533DP and the displayed rip rate ranged from 7.8x to 8.9x.

Our conclusions: The rip rate displayed by iTunes seems to be inaccurate but is not far off. The rip rate will vary a lot among tracks and CDs on the same computer. Different tracks can lead to different conclusions about the relative rip rate of various computers. In other words, there is a lot of variability in ripping.

Saw something? Send a tip

The archive ran on reader tips. What did you see, where, and do you want the credit?

Read by the editor. Never published without your say.

More in Mac OS · This month in the archive