Skip to main content

Poll

How fast is your process?

  • 1X
    3 (16.7%)
  • 2X
    4 (22.2%)
  • 3X
    1 (5.6%)
  • 4X
    3 (16.7%)
  • 5X
    3 (16.7%)
  • ?X
    4 (22.2%)

Total Members Voted: 36

Topic: EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll (Read 6077 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • chemeye
  • [*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
If your speed is faster than 1X  PLEASE tell me what I can do to speed mine up!!
(Besides buying more RAM or a faster processor..)


Hello.  I am new to  the EAC/Flac world and posting on this forum but I have read MANY different set-up guides and related posts.  I think I have EAC configured as it should be...

I am getting an average total runtime/speed of 1.3X--factoring in the little time it takes to compress to Flac--This speed drops below 1X! 

I create CUE Sheet (non-compliant)
TEST and COPY Selected Tracks-Compressed

Example:  A 55min CD = 1Hr22min Total

----------------
Command Line is set for -6 -V...........................(-8 was even slower)
YES-Accurate Stream
YES-Drive Caches
NO-C2(according to EAC My drive has this and some other website source I came across along the way seconds this)[Am I correct in my understanding that a drives C2 feature is not to be trusted?  But with C2 enabled, EAC will read the C2 info. first, and if there are any conflicts EAC will read and re-read the data again and again...until the errors are corrected?]  -I tried the whole process with C2 Box checked YES and the speed was more like 2X  I like that!

I have set my read offset correction with help of Feurio and AccurateRip
--------------

Are there any key settings I might have enabled or disabled that could speed this process up?
I did try the COPY IMAGE and create CUE Sheet Method once and it was much faster!!!!(Maybe 5X)---However, I do not yet understand how to deal with the Image and CUE Sheet--How to make them turn back into individual tracks...
  • Last Edit: 08 March, 2005, 05:06:52 PM by chemeye

  • chemeye
  • [*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #1
Well, looks like nobody has any help for me..
Three(3)!!!!people voted on this poll so far, and i was one of them..come on.

Any way a little update:  I have been copying Cds with Burst Mode and the speed is super fast. 

..I make sure and check the CRC data matches in the text document file when the extraction/conversion process is done.
If any tracks say "copy finished" (not:"copy OK") -I re-do that track in secure mode.

With burst mode I am able to copy a 48min CD in 5min.

  I'm good with these kind of numbers...I don't mind to wait in the case of a badly scratched CD or for one or two tracks here and there...

***Can anyone tell me why NOT to use Burst mode when the source CD is in good condition and the resulting CRCs match????***

  • neutral_00
  • [*][*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #2
How fast is your computer ?
RAM
CPU
Death is the one thing we all face

  • chemeye
  • [*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #3
Quote
How fast is your computer ?
RAM
CPU
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=281604"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



RAM: 512 PC-2700
CPU: AMD Athlon XP 3000+ Processor


Will more RAM speed up EAC?

  • neutral_00
  • [*][*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #4
Quote
Quote
How fast is your computer ?
RAM
CPU
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=281604"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



RAM: 512 PC-2700
CPU: AMD Athlon XP 3000+ Processor


Will more RAM speed up EAC?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=281613"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Your PC is very fast compard to this PC. 
Ram: 384 PC- 100
CPU: Intel P3 600 Mhz

It is probily your CD-Drive, in drive options of EAC there is an option to let the
drive slow to 1x. If your drive is like mine it will stay at 1x until you reboot or
open you close the CD tray   

Changing the option should make your drive stay at 4x to 6x depending on how
scratched thecd is.
Death is the one thing we all face

  • Josef K.
  • [*][*][*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #5
Quote
Quote
How fast is your computer ?
RAM
CPU
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=281604"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

RAM: 512 PC-2700
CPU: AMD Athlon XP 3000+ Processor

Will more RAM speed up EAC?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=281613"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, here on AMD Athlon XP 2700+ Processor (and 1,5 Gb of RAM, but I don't think it's important) the speed is 5-12x in secure mode with encoding to flac at the same time.
IMHO the most important is your CDrom drive and it's settings. My is Plextore PX-W5224A and important setting is DMA (Direct Memory Access) enabled. I really don't know where it can be checked in great XP system  , I've got checkbox right in Plextools 

Quote
***Can anyone tell me why NOT to use Burst mode when the source CD is in good condition and the resulting CRCs match????***

Because there is no control at all about the quality. No error-detection or error-correction is performed in this mode. So your rips are just game of chance in this mode.
Is there a difference between yes and no?

  • Lokutus01
  • [*][*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #6
the only way to go:
1.) with dma enabled Plextor-drive (non of these cheap ones)
2.) EAC-secure without C2-information AND Test&Copy

I realized that CPU or Ram did not make any difference if it is something over 700MHz. Flac encodes faster than EAC rips in the most secure mode

  • Martin H
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #7
Chemeye - If you rip with Test and Copy - Burst mode, and you get crc ok, then that is equal in security to a normal secure mode rip with a track quality of 100%(no extra rereadings). Also when you rip with a drive that caches audio then it would be faster to do Test and Copy - Burst than to do a normal secure mode rip because EAC dosent have to flush the cache under ripping. -Martin.

  • chemeye
  • [*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #8
Thaanks for the input and replies.

neutral 00-------I will play around with the speed setting in drive options.  I had actually managed to overlook that setting-even after dozens of re-configures and "re-set-ups"__thanks for pointing it out!Mine was(is) set to "Actual" -this was recommended by most if not all set-up guides I came across. Plus, I think this setting only comes into play in Secure Mode..

I have been using "Burst Mode" + "Test & Copy" with good results. 
...CRCs match and the .flacs sound great!

When the CRCs do not match -or-
the text Log file says "timing error" or "Copy finished" ("Not Copy OK")I re-rip the problem track in Secure with all the bells and whistles which takes (Alot) longer but ends up 100% in the end.

-------Thanks Martin H
I was pretty sure I read somewhere that Burst Mode + Test and Copy with good/matching CRCs = an accurate rip. 
_____I am willing to hear from anyone why this is not a good way to go________________!

>>>The Drive I am using for the process is a Lite-on DVDRW  SOHW-832S.  It Caches and has C2 ability-I do not use either feature- I leave the info reading to EAC

How much are these magic Plextor Drives anyway?

  • Martin H
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #9
Burst mode dosent have any error correction, so when EAC is reporting "Timming error"s or "Suspicius Position"s, then those are not actual errors but merely an indication of an read operation that took a little longer than expected. This is from the EAC site :

  At least I implemented a small help. If the stream ever breaks, it will tell the user in the status report by showing up suspicous positions. Of course this is only heuristic; there needn't be any errors on that positions; moreover there could be errors that are not found at all.

-Martin.

  • Josef K.
  • [*][*][*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #10
Quote
Thaanks for the input and replies.
I was pretty sure I read somewhere that Burst Mode + Test and Copy with good/matching CRCs = an accurate rip. 
_____I am willing to hear from anyone why this is not a good way to go________________!
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This seems to be explicit (from [a href="http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/]official EAC page[/url], "Technology" section, paragraph 4):
Quote
This program is really damn slow in secure mode in comparison with other grabbers, but the program checks every sector over and over to get the correct data with high certainty. If you don't like this feature of EAC and prefer fast copies instead of secure copies, you should use the fast or burst extraction option in the options menu. But of course in fast mode, the program will no longer be able to find read errors. Only if a read error occurs in a sector synchronization area, will a sync error will still be displayed. Fast mode is sector synchronized with 2 blocks of 23 as synchronization blocks. Burst copy is even worse, no synchronization is done, enabling extraction at maximum speed of the drive. No error checking of any kind can be performed. At least I implemented a small help. If the stream ever breaks, it will tell the user in the status report by showing up suspicous positions. Of course this is only heuristic; there needn't be any errors on that positions; moreover there could be errors that are not found at all .
Is there a difference between yes and no?

  • Cerbie
  • [*][*][*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #11
I get 2-3x with a 1800+, FLAC -8, and LAME --APE, with secure mode (no caching, drive catches C2 errors)! Lite-On 812s (Same as 832s).
  • Last Edit: 16 March, 2005, 10:50:19 PM by Cerbie

  • chemeye
  • [*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #12
Quote
Burst mode dosent have any error correction, so when EAC is reporting "Timming error"s or "Suspicius Position"s, then those are not actual errors but merely an indication of an read operation that took a little longer than expected. This is from the EAC site :

  At least I implemented a small help. If the stream ever breaks, it will tell the user in the status report by showing up suspicous positions. Of course this is only heuristic; there needn't be any errors on that positions; moreover there could be errors that are not found at all.

-Martin.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=282619"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



OK, I had to look up _heuristic_ in the dictionary-  very interesting word...

As your say: "if the stream ever breaks, it will tell the user...by showing up 'suspicious positions'............"-

-the "stream breaks" ........what does this refer to?


Marin H---------
What process(es) do you use for your computer audio experience?And if EAC>Flac  -do you use Burst Mode?or Secure?...Or?
  • Last Edit: 17 March, 2005, 02:38:22 AM by chemeye

  • chemeye
  • [*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #13
Quote from: Josef K.,Mar 16 2005, 04:53 AM

Quote from: chemeye,Mar 14 2005, 11:18 PM
Thaanks for the input and replies.
I was pretty sure I read somewhere that Burst Mode + Test and Copy with good/matching CRCs = an accurate rip. 
_____I am willing to hear from anyone why this is not a good way to go________________!
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This seems to be explicit (from [a href="http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/]official EAC page[/url], "Technology" section, paragraph 4):


".... of course in fast mode, the program will no longer be able to find read errors. Only if a read error occurs in a sector synchronization area, will a sync error will still be displayed. Fast mode is sector synchronized with 2 blocks of 23 as synchronization blocks. Burst copy is even worse, no synchronization is done, enabling extraction at maximum speed of the drive. No error checking of any kind can be performed. At least I implemented a small help. If the stream ever breaks, it will tell the user in the status report by showing up suspicous positions. Of course this is only heuristic; there needn't be any errors on that positions; moreover there could be errors that are not found at all .

[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=282638"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]
Admittedly, I have more reading to do on the official EAC site.."Technology para 4"

I am not understanding the difference between read errors, sync errors.

**["Only if a read error occurs in a sector synchronization area, will a sync error will still be displayed.]"
What is a sector synchronization area?2 blocks of 23??? 

***["Burst copy is even worse, no synchronization is done, "]--
-I'm sorry if this is naive but what exactly is 'synchronization'?

Thanks

  • Martin H
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
EAC > Flac Runtime/Speed Poll
Reply #14
Synchronization is "Jitter correction" and is used in non "Accurate stream" drives. It works by making overlapping reads...
  • Last Edit: 26 March, 2005, 08:11:49 PM by Martin H