Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[benn600]

Surprisingly enough, I buy brand new CDs from yourmusic.com and occasionally get a brand new, unopened CD that produces horrible ripping results!  I just ripped a CD earlier today and another a day or two ago that gave these issues.  First, any ideas on what the...?!

More importantly, with the one I tried today, about half the tracks came back with under 90% and a few were unreliable.  The drive I used was a Pioneer.  So I went to another computer with a generic drive...both are DVD burners.  It took a long time like my Pioneer, maybe twice the normal time (both in secure mode).  But it produced 100% copies!

My question is complex...any ideas on the whole situation?  Do some drives have an internal error checking system that tries to make the data check out so MC may not know it's getting fudged data?  The second drive can almost always get good reads of songs ... and maybe always, but I switched drives a while back so can't remember for sure if always is true.

It just seems strange how there can be that big of a difference...not to mention the fact that brand new discs do that.

Also, one CD I couldn't read in a few drives so I contacted BMG and they sent me a second copy.  It had the SAME problem with the SAME song.  It was one of the extra, bonus tracks, but hmm.  I did eventually get a good read after quite a few tries but it confused me.

[hsc]

Just a guess, but the CDs you are refering to might have some sort of copy protection and different drives can give very different results on these. If you could list the CDs which gave most trouble, I could check if these are really copy protected. There are databases out there listing CDs with copy protection. Also: the exact model and the firmware of your drives would help to verify your problems.

Regards,
Horst

[benn600]

Great point.  I, interestingly enough (however), have ripped many copy-protected CDs with no problems at all.  I think I have autorun turned off, though.  I find it horrible that less popular artists release copy-protected CDs.

[MadJewDisaster]

You have to know than brand new cds can give hard time to rip....
Now , look like you are mixing 2 things

The % of the result DOES NOT tell you about the quality of the rip.

It is the "Completed Ok" who tells you if rip ok or not

The % is just telling you if MC had to re-read more  than once a sector to get a SECURE RIP

If only Read and Re-Read , you get 100%

If 4 sectors needed 2 Re-Read , you get X%

But you just DO NOT care about , as far as you see : "Completed Ok" == you rip is secure and 100% ok

If you see  'unreliable' , in this case it means than was errors in the rip .
Now can be a so small error than no one can hear it .

Here is a 3 minutes old log

Double digipack CD still wrapped [?] in this kind of cellophane == means was not open since leaving factory :

Secure Rip Log created at 21:44:32  Thursday, May 10, 2007

The quality percentage is the ratio of the minimum number of re-reads
to the actual number of re-reads of the CD data sectors.

I: Reserved-2-Dinner - VIP AREAS
   Track  1: Completed Ok - Quality 100.00% [Orange Factory - To Sleep To Dream]
   Track  2: Completed Ok - Quality 95.36% [Belladona - Heroes]
      00:02:56  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:04:15  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:05:20  3 re-reads required to get good data
      00:06:07  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  3: Completed Ok - Quality 95.92% [X-Bass - What I Mean]
      00:00:46  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:02:24  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:03:00  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  4: Completed Ok - Quality 98.78% [ll - Guy & Cesar]
      00:04:30  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  5: Completed Ok - Quality 94.01% [Dust - Donna]
      00:00:10  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:00:28  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:01:48  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:02:06  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:04:26  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:05:06  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  6: Completed Ok - Quality 97.56% [Tunnel Holland Project - Never Let You Go]
      00:00:03  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:00:25  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  7: Completed Ok - Quality 100.00% [Tunnel Holland Project - Keep Your Head Up]
   Track  8: Completed Ok - Quality 99.02% [Banda Favela - Samba De Ile]
      00:03:14  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  9: Completed Ok - Quality 98.99% [Ohm Guru - I Wonder]
      00:00:00  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  10: Completed Ok - Quality 98.16% [Black Might Orchestra - Give Me Your Love]
      00:01:12  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:04:04  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  11: Completed Ok - Quality 97.03% [DJ Moses - Hold My Hand]
      00:02:20  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:04:08  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:04:58  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  12: Completed Ok - Quality 99.13% [Belladonna - I Wanna Boogie]
      00:01:44  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  13: Completed Ok - Quality 98.28% [Dancefloor Syndicate - Watching]
      00:00:39  2 re-reads required to get good data
      00:05:34  2 re-reads required to get good data
   Track  14: Completed Ok - Quality 100.00% [Bossa Nostra - Chico Desperado]

The rip is ok at 100% but few re-reads needed on some sectors .

But , again rip is 100% ok

Concerning your Bonus track it can be 2 things
-Track is in fact at the very start of the CD - You need to preess RW on a CD desk to play it
- Bonus track made the CD full to the max data it can get, and the last track [who is at the external side of the CD get big trouble to be rip - If possible to rip it
You need to change offset or something like it before trying to rip the track
I do not remember exactly - But not something you can do with MC , so , no important .


Concerning drives you use to rip
There is HUDGE differences

One drive will never be able to give you a rip with 100% in years [ but still giving you a good secure rip]
One drive will give you unreliable results at the first defect on the cd , when 10 other drives will give you ok and 100%  rip from the same cd .

If drives are on the same computer , it is really worth to run once EAC who will tell you about you drives - From the best to the worst for a secure rip.

My best drive to rip in my old DVD drive - If this drive cannot rip , means cd is really fuc...
And this drive was giving good rips where my Plextor failed
As a rule all the DVD-W drives rip better than any CD-W or CDR drive.
And , you know what ? The drives riping the best are the slower ones to rip

No way to get a X25 or X12 with a DVD-R or a DVD-W drive - More like a max around X3.

For the ones thinking i'am a new user , i'am in fact the biggest ripper of all MC users
I ripped tons with MC 7 - MC8
I ripped my whole collection [3500+ Cds at the time ] with MC 9 and converted to  mp3

But changed my mind and did all OGG
Until i found MPC the best and started all again ....This time with EAC  , but not for long cause i hate this prog

I know lossless......... , but drives are not diry cheap everywhere...........

There is not a week i do not rip - Like today = back home with 23 new cds.
And i can tell you how many i riped from Start of the year up to end of April , wait ...

9171 tracks.

So i know when i'am speaking about rip and get a lot of tips .

Beside it , if you rip your CDs , i'am not sure secure rip worth a penny: you may get one bad song each thousand songs
Non secure must more faster .. and you may have few songs to rerip secure
If CDs near you , not a big deal.

But i still rip secure only

If not lazy , i may post my tips one day ..........

[benn600]

I also rip a lot.  I have over 1,000 CDs that I started ripping August of last year.  I just bought over 100 CDs in the past few weeks.  By the way, every song in my library returned 100% for me.  If I got anything under 100%, I kept trying on multiple drives or bought a replacement.

[MadJewDisaster]

And you wrong .

You may buy 12 456 789 098 times the same cd and still not get the 'famous' 100%

But , i'am sure many others will tell you  , including MC gurus staff.

[benn600]

But I have gotten 100% on every single song in my 13 THOUSAND song library, all directly from CD (and with 100% read quality!!).  I only had to buy a handful of replacement CDs.  Our CDs are in good condition.

[JONCAT]

To summarize?:

It seems then that it is drive dependent, not disc related. If you get under 100%, which simply means the drive had "trouble" with sectors, and switch to a different drive to achieve 100%....you have only found a more effective drive.

If you see under 100% AND "completed with unreliable data" then most likely any drive will return similar results but I guess you would want to check another drive if you have another available.

DC

[MadJewDisaster]

If you see under 100% AND "completed with unreliable data" then most likely any drive will return similar results but I guess you would want to check another drive if you have another available.

Not really - Another drive can give perfect rip
Beside this - Cleaning CD - Give the drive a break if working since a long time  can do the trick

[hit_ny]

Instead of trying other drives, why don't you you try with another ripping program, EAC should do the job ?

If you get the same result, then maybe the drive's at fault, even then, assuming the disc is in good condition etc.  Try on a lite-on drive, very forgiving readers.

[Listener]

Instead of trying other drives, why don't you you try with another ripping program, EAC should do the job ?

If you get the same result, then maybe the drive's at fault, even then, assuming the disc is in good condition etc.  Try on a lite-on drive, very forgiving readers.

My experience is different.

I ripped over 2000 CDs mostly with 2 recent Lite-on drives.  They weren't very fast with MC or EAC and they were rather likely to have problems reading Cds without visible scratches or other flaws.  Often just re-ripping the CD would produce an error free rip after the first rip.  Removing the CD from the drawer and blowing on it, replacing it in the drive and re-ripping often produced an error-free rip after an unreliable rip.  In contrast, the Toshiba drive in my Toshiba laptop was slower but far less finicky. 

I also compared results between ripping with MC and EAC when I was unable to get a reliable rip with MC.  EAC didn't produce a reliable rip for a single such CD.

Three web site with reviews of DVD drives:

http://www.cdfreaks.com/
http://www.cdrlabs.com/
http://www.cdrinfo.com/

Bill

[hit_ny]

Toshiba don't make drives, yours is probably a (lite-on or pioneer) rebadge.

maybe i should have said in general and this is one of those grey areas, where there are exceptions.

[Listener]

Toshiba don't make drives, yours is probably a (lite-on or pioneer) rebadge.

maybe i should have said in general and this is one of those grey areas, where there are exceptions.

I described the drive as a Toshiba drive since both MC and Windows describe it thay way. (Toshiba DVD-ROM SD-R2412)

My laptop is about 4 years old.  I have no information about whether the drive hardware was made by Toshiba or an OEM.  Nor do I know know whether it was identical to some other drive made by an OEM or whether Toshiba specified anything special for the drive.  Nor do I know whether whether the firmware in the drive is the same as the firmware in some other drive made by an OEM.  Do you?

The point of my post was to relate my experience with recent Liteon drives.  It wasn't a recommendation for the drive in my laptop.  What was the point of your post?

Bill