Skip to main content
Topic: Is there any reason to do a secure rip when AccurateRip exists (Read 241 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is there any reason to do a secure rip when AccurateRip exists

I'm using XLD on my Mac to rip CDs.  I ripping set to use XLD Secure Ripper.

But now I am wondering.  Is there any reason I can't just use burst mode.  If the rip after burst mode passes AccurateRip verification, doesn't that mean I have a good rip?

Re: Is there any reason to do a secure rip when AccurateRip exists

Reply #1
If the confidence is at least 3, then no, burst is enough.
Error 404; signature server not available.

Re: Is there any reason to do a secure rip when AccurateRip exists

Reply #2
dBpoweramp, from the creator of AccurateRip, does burst first - and if then it is verified with AccurateRip, that is it. Sensible.

I can remember I once wanted it to do different, but I'm not sure if it were even an issue: I once re-ripped on a different computer (but same drive), and wanted to avoid verifying against "myself-only". Those were cases where my submission was the only one on record.

Oh, and there is a chance that burst & verify might let through some defective pressings where error detection would have come up with red flags - but if so: what is then a "correct rip"?
High Voltage socket-nose-avatar

Re: Is there any reason to do a secure rip when AccurateRip exists

Reply #3
AccurateRip is as secure as it gets, so no, there's no need for secure rip, whatever software you're using.
Codec enthusiast!

 

Re: Is there any reason to do a secure rip when AccurateRip exists

Reply #4
Secure ripping REALLY puts a strain your drive.  I just killed a cheap external drive and I think secure ripping may be the issue.  So, if I can burst rip, that would help remove a lot of strain on the drive.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020