Error tolerance codec Options

[winniepooh]

What lossless codec should be used for error tolerance? e.g. can tolerate some damage to the file data,
is FLAC a good choice or I have to use WinRAR "Recovery Record" to archive my albums?

[DARcode]

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...less_comparison

Error handling portion of the Comparison Table.

[pest]

or I have to use WinRAR "Recovery Record" to archive my albums?

if you only archive your albums "recovery records" are more reliable than
the codecs error-protection because they only silence bad blocks (afaik).

[Emanuel]

Or search for "par2" or "quickpar" - will give you playable flac files along with par2 recovery files.

[MedO]

Or search for "par2" or "quickpar" - will give you playable flac files along with par2 recovery files.

Have a look at www.dvdisaster.com as well, for protecting CDs/DVDs it has some advantages over Quickpar, though it's more difficult to use.

[pepoluan]

Well, since foobar2000 can unpack RAR files...

1. Encode with an error-correction capable lossless e.g. FLAC (WavPack? OptimFROG?)
2. Store (no need to compress) in a Recovery-Record equipped RAR
3. Make a QuickPar recovery file outside of it
4. Store it in a DVDisaster-protected CD/DVD

There

[beto]

Have a look at www.dvdisaster.com as well, for protecting CDs/DVDs it has some advantages over Quickpar, though it's more difficult to use.

You're kidding right? Quickpar is unusable if you are a novice whereas dvdisaster is much more straightforward.

[MedO]

Have a look at www.dvdisaster.com as well, for protecting CDs/DVDs it has some advantages over Quickpar, though it's more difficult to use.

You're kidding right? Quickpar is unusable if you are a novice whereas dvdisaster is much more straightforward.

It depends I guess. With Quickpar you don't have to worry about storing the recovery files off-cd (when using method 1), or creating an image before adding the recovery information.
Of course, Quickpar has many options to confuse with and not the most casual-user-friendly UI.

[pepoluan]

Have a look at www.dvdisaster.com as well, for protecting CDs/DVDs it has some advantages over Quickpar, though it's more difficult to use.

You're kidding right? Quickpar is unusable if you are a novice whereas dvdisaster is much more straightforward.

It depends I guess. With Quickpar you don't have to worry about storing the recovery files off-cd (when using method 1), or creating an image before adding the recovery information.
Of course, Quickpar has many options to confuse with and not the most casual-user-friendly UI.

Method 1?

[HotshotGG]

What lossless codec should be used for error tolerance? e.g. can tolerate some damage to the file data,
is FLAC a good choice or I have to use WinRAR "Recovery Record" to archive my albums?

FLAC calculates MD5 checksums does it not?

[MedO]

Have a look at www.dvdisaster.com as well, for protecting CDs/DVDs it has some advantages over Quickpar, though it's more difficult to use.

You're kidding right? Quickpar is unusable if you are a novice whereas dvdisaster is much more straightforward.

It depends I guess. With Quickpar you don't have to worry about storing the recovery files off-cd (when using method 1), or creating an image before adding the recovery information.
Of course, Quickpar has many options to confuse with and not the most casual-user-friendly UI.

Method 1?

There are two methods of error correction in dvdisaster. Both use Reed-Solomon codes (like Quickpar) to create redundand data. Method 1 (RS01) stores the ecc data in a file. Unlike the .par2-files, this file is not made to be robust in order to save space, so it has to be stored on a different, safe medium. The author recommends burning some ecc files together on another CD/DVD which is in turn protected by dvdisaster...

With Method 2 (RS02), the ecc data is integrated directly into the CD image.

[beto]

It depends I guess. With Quickpar you don't have to worry about storing the recovery files off-cd (when using method 1), or creating an image before adding the recovery information.
Of course, Quickpar has many options to confuse with and not the most casual-user-friendly UI.

Of course it all boils down to personal preference in the end, but to my knowledge you always have to store the recovery files off-cd as in a different CD/DVD than the original source. Otherwise you are not protecting anything.

[Andavari]

What lossless codec should be used for error tolerance? e.g. can tolerate some damage to the file data,
is FLAC a good choice or I have to use WinRAR "Recovery Record" to archive my albums?

FLAC calculates MD5 checksums does it not?

Good point. Wavpack can also use checksums as long as -m is used during encoding and decoding.

[jcoalson]

MD5 sums are for error detection. rendundancy schemes like reed-solomon etc are for error correction in the presence of errors, i.e. even if the file is damaged (to some extent) you can recover it completely.

the original question is about tolerance which I take to mean: can the codec recover and keep decoding when it hits an error, limiting the loss to a small area around the damage? the error handling column on the wiki is for this. but this is more based on the stated abilities of the codecs and has not really been quantified well. if this is an important feature, you should damage some files and test the different codecs.

the next release of flac has even better error tolerance and can handle every kind of damage to a file that I've run across or has been submitted to me, losing only the damaged frames.

Josh

[TREX6662k6]

the next release of flac has even better error tolerance and can handle every kind of damage to a file that I've run across or has been submitted to me, losing only the damaged frames.

Sounds very intresting.

1. Encode with an error-correction capable lossless e.g. FLAC (WavPack? OptimFROG?)
2. Store (no need to compress) in a Recovery-Record equipped RAR
3. Make a QuickPar recovery file outside of it
4. Store it in a DVDisaster-protected CD/DVD

Isnt the need to make a rar made redundant since QuickPar is used?

[MedO]

the next release of flac has even better error tolerance and can handle every kind of damage to a file that I've run across or has been submitted to me, losing only the damaged frames.

Sounds very intresting.

1. Encode with an error-correction capable lossless e.g. FLAC (WavPack? OptimFROG?)
2. Store (no need to compress) in a Recovery-Record equipped RAR
3. Make a QuickPar recovery file outside of it
4. Store it in a DVDisaster-protected CD/DVD

Isnt the need to make a rar made redundant since QuickPar is used?

Adding redundancy is what error correction is about
But I think pepoluan was drawing an overkill scenario here. There is no use IMO in using Quickpar on a CD protected by dvdisaster. Why? Because the "unit of failure" on a CD-ROM is one sector (2KiB). Dvdisaster's blocks match those sectors, so if a sector fails, you lose one block, 2KiB in size. Due to the large blocksizes you have to use with Quickpar for protecting an entire CD (those blocks might not align with the sector boundaries even), if a single sector fails you lose 1-2 blocks of about 50kb (this is actually idealistic, calculating the .par2-files with so small blocks would take 1.5 hours on my pc). This means quite a bit of ECC data is wasted even though it might be entirely undamaged, so it would be better to use the extra space for a stronger dvdisaster-protection. Please note that the effect is somewhat lessened by the fact that sectors on CDs tend to give up in large groups (because of scratches for example).

[pepoluan]

But I think pepoluan was drawing an overkill scenario here. There is no use IMO in using Quickpar on a CD protected by dvdisaster. Why? Because the "unit of failure" on a CD-ROM is one sector (2KiB). Dvdisaster's blocks match those sectors, so if a sector fails, you lose one block, 2KiB in size. Due to the large blocksizes you have to use with Quickpar for protecting an entire CD (those blocks might not align with the sector boundaries even), if a single sector fails you lose 1-2 blocks of about 50kb (this is actually idealistic, calculating the .par2-files with so small blocks would take 1.5 hours on my pc). This means quite a bit of ECC data is wasted even though it might be entirely undamaged, so it would be better to use the extra space for a stronger dvdisaster-protection. Please note that the effect is somewhat lessened by the fact that sectors on CDs tend to give up in large groups (because of scratches for example).

Of course it was an overkill, that's just a kind-of joking response

Re DVDisaster, can it be used to detect possible short-run bit errors? And related, is it possible for a short-run bit error to happen that escapes Redbook CD spec?

[MedO]

Re DVDisaster, can it be used to detect possible short-run bit errors? And related, is it possible for a short-run bit error to happen that escapes Redbook CD spec?

Do you mean a short run of corrupt bits on the CD surface, or in the data? This is not the same on a CD because of interleaving.
On the surface of a Redbook-CD, a defect of up to 3000 consecutive data bits (excluding ecc) should theoretically be recoverable and in any case detectable. This is not an accurate figure, but it should be somewhere around this value if I understand the circ-ecc correctly.

On data CDs, there is an additional ECC and EDC for every sector, so possible errors that went undetected by the CIRC code are likely to be caught here.

On top of all that, DVDisaster calculates another checksum for every sector, and it is highly unlikely that an error escapes both checks.

I hope that was what you wanted to know

[pepoluan]

Thanks MedO! The penultimate sentence was actually what I asked.

So, in short DVDisaster is my best bet for an error free Redbook-CD, right? Or, more precisely, error-free data extraction from a Redbook-CD?

[MedO]

Thanks MedO! The penultimate sentence was actually what I asked.

So, in short DVDisaster is my best bet for an error free Redbook-CD, right? Or, more precisely, error-free data extraction from a Redbook-CD?

Not really, sorry. Dvdisaster does not work with Audio CDs.

[pepoluan]

Bleh sorry, my mistake. I meant to ask Data-CD.