EAC and it seemed good, but EXTREMLY slow. I then got AG and it was SOOO much faster and they have what appears to me the Same quality

The reason EAC seemed so slow was that it was spending extra time fixing errors that AG just ignores. The more EAC has to fix, the longer it takes. If you want you can configure EAC to ignore errors, and it will run nearly as fast as AG, but why bother in that case, because the AG user interface is much friendlier (though vastly less powerful) than EACs.

As far as the errors go -- the great majority of errors that EAC finds and fixes are probably so minor that the only way you could dectect them would be with instrumentation; you'd never actually hear the difference in an A/B listening test.

EAC is great for compulsive perfectionists like myself. (I just spent about 250 man-hours re-ripping, tagging, and encoding my entire 10,000 track collection, mostly to make all the tags perfect.) Otherwise AG is just fine.

tanstaafl.