EAC... how perfect? How does it work?, Redundant, but more detailed questions |
EAC... how perfect? How does it work?, Redundant, but more detailed questions |
Mar 10 2003, 01:55
Post
#1
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 95 Joined: 10-March 03 Member No.: 5399 |
I've been reading HydrogenAudio for a couple of weeks now and think
this place is a real gem for audio nuts. I am about ready to proceed to backup about 250 CDs of mine on a RAID-1 setup. I plan to rip all the CDs using a LGE HL-DT-ST RW/DVD GCC-4240N drive and EAC 0.9b4. Though, before doing do, I would love to have your input regarding a couple of points I have a hard time with. I hope you won't find these questions redundant. I know some, or most, have already been asked but I never was satisfied with the answers (*not* that I think anybody _has_ to provide an answer I will be happy with...). So here goes for the questions : 1. Is it true that (at minimum) in any of the Secure modes EAC will read at least twice every thing it reads? I ask so because there are no confirmation anywhere in the software that it is doing so. It would be nice if during the rip process a little string saying "currently reading each sector twice" or something would appear. When, if ever, does EAC perform only one read of the audio? 2. Exactly what does it read twice? How big is the chunk of data that is being read? 10x2352 bytes? 2352 bytes? 1 bit? 3. I know this has already been asked at digital-inn.de, but I don't think I understood the answer fully. How sure can we be that EAC really does detect and "correct" errors? I mean, lets say there is a minor scratch on one of my CDs. My drive reads through the scratch.. the returned data is, say 0x2431. It reads again and the data is still 0x2431. EAC thinks this is fine. But the scratch is done in such a way that the reflected information is always the same, AND wrong. How could EAC deal with this physical anomaly? I remember Andre (the author of EAC) said something like it was very unlikely that the same data could be read from a scratch or spot (or whatever damage there is) on the CD. But how sure are we of that? 4. If I intend to keep all the ripped music on my computer and not duplicate it on, say, CD-R media, should I go nuts with the offsets? I did tests myself and I tried to inject a -10000 offset and then a +10000 offset and it didn't mater at all sound wise. I checked with a WAV editor (Audacity) and the difference (the time-offset) was really minimal and only cutting or adding silence (haven't found a CD that starts with music too soon). If I want to extract all the tracks as one big WAV file, am I right to say that the digital extraction is successful anyway, that the offset only induces a time-shift (a very, very small one)? Or is there a subtlety I didn't grasp? 5. A very important (to me) question. When EAC commands the drive to read whatever amount it has to during its rip process, what error correction is performed by the drive? Is it using the Reed Salomon ECC error codes from the disc? In DAE mode (... is it a 'mode' ?), if the drive detects a problem on the disc (scratch, etc.) will it try to interpolate between two points or will it just send the data back unmodified? Asked differently, in DAE mode does the drive treat the audio data as audio or as data? Reading http://www.roxio.com/en/support/cdr/cderrors.html leads one to believe there are many more problems to deal with that "only" scratches and finger prints. The actual CD might have errors injected during its pressing (!). 6. I have a HL-DT-ST RW/DVD GCC-4240N drive. It is a low-profile combo (DVD + CD-RW) drive. When I perform a rip using EAC and this drive, will it be of the same quality from a rip performed from, say, a Plextor Ultraplex drive? 7. Last question... what is the ETA for the next release of EAC? Thanks for your time and patience ! :-) |
|
|
|
![]() |
Mar 11 2003, 13:14
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Group: Members (Donating) Posts: 591 Joined: 11-February 03 From: UK Member No.: 4952 |
QUOTE (Radetzky @ Mar 11 2003 - 04:06 AM) But if the drive always provide the same value from it's interpolation technique... we have a problem, no? Yes and no. Yes, because you will not have read the right value at that position. No, because the drive can't do any better so interpolation is the best option available. If C2 reporting by the drive is done properly, though, EAC will still be able to suspect that interpolation has been done at that position. QUOTE I saw _ben_ questionned the term 'quality'. I too have a problem understanding what you mean (even with the explanation you gave him)... ....................will I have the _exact_ same .wav file on my hdd (not taking into account the potentiel different offsets) ? "Quality" concerns the whole drive. That is, e.g. a better laser pickup will read flawlessly where other drives would be needing interpolating, and so on. On a bad CD, with difficult positions, EAC-rips can thus be different with different drives. Ofcourse, if there are such positions, you want to know. My method is to use a drive with good C2 report. Then, rip in secure mode with C2 setting enabled, no cacheflushing, and offset correction, and do test+copy. Then, if there are C2 errors you'll have a less than 100% track quality, so even if test and copy CRCs match, you'll know there is a possibly interpolated position. If this occurs, take a second drive: different brand, different chips. (this is why you need offset correction; to compare with the second drive). If it returns the same rip CRC, all is fine. Else, since interpolation values of different drives will probably be slightly different, you can see the problem spot from wav-compare. Why do I set no-cache mode? Because in my experience, less read errors occur with that setting; EAC doesn't flush the cache every 2MBs, and the pickup thus does less work. Ofcourse, this setting makes error correction by EAC useless (because re-reads will come from cache). But that's why you do test+copy. And besides, I don't want error-correction the EAC-way if not necessary. I just want to know if there's a troublesome scratch and if there is, I'll get another disc to rip from... Edit: tried to make last paragraph more readable. This post has been edited by Patsoe: Mar 11 2003, 13:32 |
|
|
|
Radetzky EAC... how perfect? How does it work? Mar 10 2003, 01:55
Mr. Mulder The ETA for the next version of EAC is the same as... Mar 10 2003, 09:00
Pio2001 Interesting questions indeed B)
No !
As ... Mar 10 2003, 13:21
tigre Great answer, Pio2001 - You should add this thread... Mar 10 2003, 14:49
AtaqueEG QUOTE (tigre @ Mar 10 2003 - 09:49 AM)Great a... Mar 10 2003, 18:40
NumLOCK QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Mar 10 2003 - 01:21 PM)It is... Mar 10 2003, 19:16
BadReligionPR QUOTE (NumLOCK @ Mar 10 2003 - 10:16 AM)I per... Mar 10 2003, 19:58
ben QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Mar 10 2003 - 12:21 PM)No, t... Mar 10 2003, 21:52
Pio2001 QUOTE (NumLOCK @ Mar 10 2003 - 09:16 PM)I per... Mar 10 2003, 22:25
Pio2001 QUOTE (AtaqueEG @ Mar 10 2003 - 08:40 PM)Seem... Mar 10 2003, 22:30
Radetzky Thanks Pio2001. Your answers sure shed light on m... Mar 11 2003, 04:06
Mr. Mulder QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Mar 10 2003 - 06:25 PM)[]try... Mar 11 2003, 07:42
tigre QUOTE (Radetzky @ Mar 10 2003 - 07:06 PM)Fina... Mar 11 2003, 09:06
tigre QUOTE (Mr. Mulder @ Mar 10 2003 - 10:42 PM)... Mar 11 2003, 09:57
Mr. Mulder Thanks tigre. Mar 11 2003, 12:00
Pio2001 QUOTE (Radetzky @ Mar 11 2003 - 06:06 AM)EAC ... Mar 11 2003, 13:33
EmDub QUOTE Finally, EAC detects the following features ... Mar 11 2003, 17:02
Radetzky Pio2001:
Hmm.. so to my question "if I rip a... Mar 12 2003, 02:17
Patsoe Radetzky: you're somewhat repeating your same ... Mar 12 2003, 10:51
Pio2001 QUOTE (Radetzky @ Mar 12 2003 - 04:17 AM)Also... Mar 12 2003, 12:43
yourtallness QUOTE What do you mean by quality? Quality as in t... Mar 12 2003, 13:27
Patsoe QUOTE (yourtallness @ Mar 12 2003 - 01:27 PM)... Mar 12 2003, 13:48
yourtallness Let me rephrase: in digital audio, a 1 that should... Mar 12 2003, 14:04
KikeG I doubt error interpolation can result in less bas... Mar 12 2003, 14:40
Patsoe QUOTE (yourtallness @ Mar 12 2003 - 02:04 PM)... Mar 12 2003, 14:44
tigre QUOTE (yourtallness @ Mar 12 2003 - 05:04 AM)... Mar 12 2003, 14:50
Radetzky I understand I've been somewhat redundant with... Mar 13 2003, 02:01
Patsoe Usually, deleting silence does the job, yes. You c... Mar 13 2003, 02:43![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd May 2013 - 23:00 |