I have the LG GSA-4120B thats also listed in this thread.

I'm ripping with secure mode, correct offset and so on. I'm a perfectionist and therefore a bit worried about the fast extraction speed. My drive extracts audio in secure mode with 20-32x?!

I think this is due to the C2 error handling but I'm not shure.
If EAC reads everything twice, it can't be faster than 24x because my drive reads with 48x CDs?

Don't understand me wrong, I love the fast extraction, I'm only worried if the results contain errors or something

If you have C2 error handling enabled (and your drive supports it) extraction is faster. There's nothing to worry about, but you do need to make absolutely sure that your drive actually supports it. The EAC tooltips say that many drives report that C2 error handling is available even though it's not.

To add some extra security you could Test and Copy. Once extraction has finished check to see all CRCs match. If that's the case, you've nothing to worry about.

thank you for the information

now i can safely enjoy the 5 min of extracting and encoding per cd

Is Test and Copy as reliable as Secure mode? I'm currently in the process of reripping my music collection and I am currently using Secure mode. Generally, it takes me 12 minutes or so to extract an entire CD with Secure mode. I had to get a new Sony CDRW drive just to have decent Secure mode ripping speeds on my one computer because my LITE-ON SOHW-832s will only rip at a max of 2x with Secure mode.

Anyway, if the CRCs match then the rip was perfect then? And does the Test and Copy mode use any type of error correction? I'm guessing it doesn't and just shows the resulting CRC values at the end. I guess my question is Test and Copy just as viable as an option to get perfect rips as Secure mode?

Yes, burst mode with test and copy is just as safe as normal secure mode. When you rip in burst mode with test and copy you will get the same security as if you had ripped with normal secure mode and gotten 100% track quality(no extra rereadings). Burst - test and copy has the exact same security level as normal secure mode, and the only difference is that secure mode can also try to correct the found errors while burst mode just reports crc ok or not. -Martin.

Cool. I think I'll try using that on the remainder of my CD collection that needs ripped. Most of my CDs don't even have one scratch on them so this mode will be better for me as most of my CDs don't need the extensive error correction of Secure mode. I still have the option to use Secure mode on certain tracks that the CRCs don't match up on.

Wait a minute!! Did you disable cache? If you are a perfectionist, then you are better off disabling the cache. This will slow down extraction but will give you perfect results.

I believe that the mechanics of my former Plextor drive were killed by high ripping speeds. Old audio CDs from the 80s are often poorly balanced and cause vibrations. Additionally, these CDs from the library have stickers on them, causing the centre of mass to be out-of-centre. I never rip with more than 8x. So what ? As long as EAC can rip alone, it doesn't matter.

That is only necessary with drives that cache the audio data.

funny that.

I agree. However, one never knows for sure which drive does and which drive doesn't cache audio data-irrespective of what EAC reports. So, it is better to be safe than sorry-as the OP is a perfectionist, it will please him when he sees his CDs being ripped at lower speeds.

the safest extraction way is imo following www.high-quality.ch.vu
that means eac secure with test & copy.
if Cd has no scratch, it will be fast still (fast is always relative), if there are scratches, you will be warned, and eac will try to sort problems out.

I made recently a weird new experience:

Tested my laptops DVD writer drive for EACs features, and found out, that it does not cashe audio data at max./fast reading speed,
but EACs test reported, that drive cashes data, when I throttled down the spped eg. to max. 8x speed !!!

imo, worrying about the safety of the cashe detection of EACs test.

What do you think about the reason for this behaviour ?
I have carried out these tests repeatedly independently, and got always this twofold results

EAC´s cache test is not 100% accurate all the time, sometimes it can fail. IMO therefore one should test for audio caching with not just EAC, but also with Feurio to be certain. -Martin.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=238731