EAC T&C without C2. Overkill? Options

[liekloo]

If you rely on C2 info when using EAC, using 'test&copy' is better than just 'copy'.

What if you don't use C2? EAC reads each sector twice and, as a result, has the oportunity to calculate CRC twice, and compare them.


Is that correct? and is the opportunity actually used? (that would mean test&copy is overkill if you disable C2)

[Volcano]

user:

On scratched CDs, I found it impossible to get matching CRCs with this drive - although there were no errors reported for each rip.

Without Test & Copy, I never would have noticed this, so IMHO it is definitely worth using ..

This is typical on scratched CDs, independent of used drive, or brand.

But even with my crappy Acer CD writer I could get matching CRCs on all tracks on one of the scratched CDs. Had that not been the case, I probably wouldn't have worried and would have thought, just like you, that CRC mismatches are perfectly normal for scratched CDs.

There might be an explanation for this - the Acer reported 100% on nearly all tracks, in other words, EAC's error correction never kicked in. On the NEC however, error correction was performed far more often, which leaves more room for minor differences between the reads which aren't audible, but still exist (which a CRC check will, of course, pick up). (I guess that's what you meant with your first point, Pio2001...?)

Anyway, I'm still a little worried about the results of the NEC with Test & Copy.