# Keeping the order of CD tracks when ripping with WMP



## Pamphili (Feb 24, 2020)

Hello, I was wondering whether anyone has experience on how to rip a classical CD with Windows Media Player in way that preserves the order of the CD tracks? For example, I want the four movements of a symphony in their correct order, not in alphabetical order.


----------



## Monsalvat (11 mo ago)

I don't personally use Windows Media Player but make sure that the track number is in the metadata, so your software knows the correct order. If this field isn't properly filled in, the software has to guess an order and it probably chooses alphabetical for convenience. When ripping, you should be able to see the metadata fields and fill them in if necessary (I know this is possible before you start ripping if you use foobar2000, for example). See the highlighted field below:


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Not familiar with WMP, but could you retitle the tracks?

1 Handel: Concerto Grosso in F Major Op. 6 No. 2, I. Andante larghetto
2 Handel: Concerto Grosso in F Major Op. 6 No. 2, II. Allegro
3 Handel: Concerto Grosso in F Major Op. 6 No. 2, III. Largo
4 Handel: Concerto Grosso in F Major Op. 6 No. 2, IV. Allegro ma non troppo


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

pianozach said:


> Not familiar with WMP, but could you retitle the tracks?


That's what I do too (adding "01," "02" and "03" as I go) though I don't use WMP either. In the past when I used it I didn't like it one bit.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

I don't rip; I make CDs. The screen showing the tracks allows me to manually move or delete them before I begin burning the disk.


----------



## RobertJTh (Sep 19, 2021)

Maybe it's better to use Exact Audio Copy for cd ripping?
It does exactly what it says - make an 1:1 copy in WAV or FLAC format, and it has great error correcting as well. Never had any problems with order of movements etc.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Fwiw: the WMA codec had its heyday during the early 2000s when Microsoft-based PocketPCs and WMPs (Windows music players) were a thing and were competing with the early Apple Nanos/iPods. I remember arguments that WMA at 64kbps couldn’t be distinguished from MP3 at 128 kbps. These things mattered at the time because music players often had 1g or less of memory. I still have loads of WMA 64kbps music stuck in files somewhere.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

DaveM said:


> Fwiw: the WMA codec had its heyday during the early 2000s when Microsoft-based PocketPCs and WMPs (Windows music players) were a thing and were competing with the early Apple Nanos/iPods. I remember arguments that WMA at 64kbps couldn’t be distinguished from MP3 at 128 kbps. These things mattered at the time because music players often had 1g or less of memory. I still have loads of WMA 64kbps music stuck in files somewhere.


----------

