Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC? (Read 31176 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #25 –
Quote from: greynol on
Quote from: db1989 on
That’s what the percentage describes: how many of the attempts obtained the same (most common) set of samples.
This is not quite correct.

From http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/en/index.php/...tion-questions/
Quote
It is the ratio between the number of minimum reads needed to perform the extraction and the number of reads that were actually performed. 100% will only occur when the CD was extracted without any rereads on errors.
Of course. I was rambling as though the figure was for a single sector at a time, but obviously EAC provides only one figure for the entire range (CD, track, whatever). I should try thinking before I post. Thanks for the important correction.

Quote from: BFG on
(I know many will question my ripping of each disc twice - once per format.  But I haven't found any other way to preserve all of the metadata, including album covers, that I've painstakingly entered by hand.  It's lost in my FLAC to MP3 processing, but there's probably something simple I'm missing.)
Indeed, there should be a simple way to perform the conversion and include metadata automatically with no trouble at all.

Quote from: Porcus on
There have been these discussions about foobar2000 losing album art in this conversion
Do you mean from the past when it could not transfer any art, or are there problems even nowadays that I’ve missed?

Quote from: pdq on
Quote from: BFG on
So as long as AccurateRip returns good results on the FLAC I'm not too overly concerned that the MP3 was faulty.
Don't you worry that there might be a random read error that gives the right data when you rip to FLAC, but the wrong data when you rip to MP3?
It happening the other way around is the scenario that’s worth worrying about, I would think. But then, in any case, how likely is it that an exactly matching checksum would occur once by chance from an inconsistent CD? (That’s a genuine question, not a trick one. )

Anyway, ripping twice is massively wasteful and should be easy to avoid using either of the methods that have already been suggested and probably many more. That would make such questions purely academic at best.

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #26 –
Quote from: greynol on
There is no software that will work the magic you request.  Spending more than 10 minutes on a ~4 minute track is a complete waste of time.
I agree entirely - from experience, it just doesn't make things better.

Whereas brasso, and stand-alone CD players, do. Plus they don't take 24 hours, or destroy your PC's CD drive in the process.

Making EAC re-read data that simply isn't there any more (label side damage), or is completely obscured (bad under side scratch) is pointless. It only makes sense on damage that sometimes causes a read error, but mostly does not cause a read error. That scenario is very damage and drive dependent. It can help sometimes - but just because it's the default fall-back in some beloved software does not mean it should be the default fall-back when we humans encounter damaged CDs. On some discs, brasso, stand-alone CD player, CTDB, and/or just manually fixing a burst rip, will be preferable.

Cheers,
David.

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #27 –
Quote from: greynol on
Quote from: Porcus on
chances are that there are lots of recoverables too

Of course, but do you honestly think this will end up in an audibly better enough result


Audibly better? If the count of scratch sounds is the yardstick, then sometimes yes – if all tracks with at least one are deemed equally useless, then very rarely (only a very few times in thousands of CDs, and likely no full CD was “saved” [edit: until CTDB arrived]). Five years ago I had quite a few rips I could have uploaded seconds from, but for obvious reasons I deleted the least tolerable ones. That said, switching drive (and maybe between dBpoweramp and EAC) was more likely to improve.

Quote from: Porcus on
to warrant the trouble?


The “trouble” of pushing a button and going to sleep? I'm not OCD'ed enough to sit there staring at it :-o



Quote from: greynol on
but for a track that takes an hour or longer?!?  Hell no!!!


FWIW, I just opened a few of my biggest .log files, and found an Accurate-verified track that actually took five hours. (Not the best drive though, but I did not know at the time.)

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #28 –
...and I have seen a rip that took hours in secure more which only took minutes in burst mode and was extracted accurately. Lots of things are possible, especially when you are willing to entertain phenomena that exists less than 1% of the time.

Also, I wouldn't be so quick to imply that errors which are benign enough to be ripped accurately in secure mode will necessarily be audible when ripped in burst mode.

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #29 –
Quote from: greynol on
...and I have seen a rip that took hours in secure more which only took minutes in burst mode and was extracted accurately.


I was about to go “who does that when the burst rip is good?” but then, EAC can still not be configured to (automatically) follow the dBpoweramp-esque workflow of burst -> AR check -> secure?


Quote from: greynol on
Lots of things are possible, especially when you are willing to entertain phenomena that exists less than 1% of the time.


Well this discussion does deal with troublesome discs.



Quote from: greynol on
Also, I wouldn't be so quick to imply that errors which are benign enough to be ripped accurately in secure mode will necessarily be audible when ripped in burst mode.


OK, maybe “FWIW” wasn't a sufficient disclaimer, but still I think you turned the “warrant the trouble” argument on its head. If I can get an AR-verified rip in my sleep, why should I instead spend an hour listening carefully through a doubtful track? Except if I am worried over a few dimes' worth of drive wear?

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #30 –
Quote from: Porcus on
EAC can still not be configured to (automatically) follow the dBpoweramp-esque workflow of burst -> AR check -> secure?

That's correct, it's either burst mode where no re-reads will be performed or secure mode where re-read sets will be performed if triggered.  Also, EAC does not make any workflow decisions based on AR results.

Quote from: greynol on
why should I instead spend an hour listening carefully through a doubtful track?

How would you then know if a track ripped with secure mode that didn't pass AR would sound any better than a track ripped using burst mode that didn't pass AR?

Quote from: greynol on
Except if I am worried over a few dimes' worth of drive wear?

Your drive might not make it through the night, in which case it wasn't exactly a few dimes' worth of wear.

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #31 –
So... I was just looking around online a bit and I found CleanDISCPro.  You mail your discs to them (Miramar Florida) and for $3 (or less depending on quantity) they will resurface them.  The good news is they won't charge you if they can't repair the disc.  Like I said, I didn't have much luck with my little polishing machine, but the service seems worth a try if you have an important irreplaceable disc.    (Actually they say they don't play the disc, so I guess you have to ask for a refund if they fail.)

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #32 –
Quote from: greynol on
Quote
why should I instead spend an hour listening carefully through a doubtful track?
How would you then know if a track ripped with secure mode that didn't pass AR would sound any better than a track ripped using burst mode that didn't pass AR?


Eh ... please read again the part of the sentence that you cut away from the quote.


Quote from: greynol on
Quote
Except if I am worried over a few dimes' worth of drive wear?

Your drive might not make it through the night, in which case it wasn't exactly a few dimes' worth of wear.


If a drive breaks down after thousands of hours, does it seem appropriate to allocate the cost to the wear from the single last track it was in the process of reading?
Once a drive is in the state where it cannot stand eight hours, isn't it then likely that you would have to replace it very soon anyway?

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #33 –
Quote from: Porcus on
Eh ... please read again the part of the sentence that you cut away from the quote.

The part about you having a crystal ball telling you that your decision to let the rip go overnight would pay off?!?  Yes, I read that.

Quote from: Porcus on
isn't it then likely that you would have to replace it very soon anyway?

Not if you are to believe what Spoon says about drive stress:
http://www.dbpoweramp.com/secure-ripper.htm

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #34 –
Quote from: greynol on
Quote from: Porcus on
Eh ... please read again the part of the sentence that you cut away from the quote.

The part about you having a crystal ball telling you that your decision to let the rip go overnight would pay off?!?  Yes, I read that.


OK, so I was wrong in assuming good faith. Not the first time.

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #35 –
Quote from: greynol on
Not if you are to believe what Spoon says about drive stress:
http://www.dbpoweramp.com/secure-ripper.htm
The data there proves the other thing that is mentioned previously in this thread: If you leave your ripping program thrashing your drive for minutes/hours, and after lots of work it finally reports an error-free rip, that rip might still have errors in it.

I've long suspected this, because I have discs where I can get an accurate rip match with one burst read pass on every track on the CD but one. That track clearly has errors, but after ten minutes effort re-ripping sectors I'm told the rip is now secure - but still doesn't match accurate rip. It seems obvious to me that this track has (on this disc, in this drive) unrecoverable errors, my rip is not correct, and labelling it "secure" is misleading at best.

In that context, it's pretty obvious what's gone wrong, and that something has gone wrong. Whereas on a disc which has loads of initial errors and/or no accurate rip match, who can really say whether the final result is accurate?

Cheers,
David.

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #36 –
Well that is just it, drives cannot detect errors 100% of the time (c2 or re-reading), an external source is required. The more re-reads that are done, the greater the chance of a consistent error (c2 can help to an extent with re-reads).

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #37 –
Quote from: Porcus on
(Secure rippers could actually improve if they would implement a feature logging the troublesome frames, and use that log upon re-ripping with another drive. Then they could pick whatever passes C1&C2 on at least one of the rips.)


I have been trying to get Spoon to add that for YEARS. Maybe Gregory will add it to CueTools ripper...

Best way to copy badly damaged CDs via EAC?

Reply #38 –
If the problem is scratches (vs stuff stuck on the plastic) I'd go with filler rather than removing material.  Ideally something (usually a wax) with the same index of refraction as the polycarbonate, but in a pinch I've even had saliva work temporarily (obviously it won't permanently affect the disk) and in that case I'd specify a slow rip speed so it doesn't just fly off.