Print

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

[nila]

IGNORE THIS - I started playing around a bit in the settings and after setting the mode to ASPII I found I was getting a lot faster speeds.
They now match EAC more or less.
Pity there's no option to delete posts so I can remove this to not waste you guy's time.
Thanks and Sorry for the wasted post!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hiya,
Just tried to rip an album. You've included ripping speed now which is quite nice. - Thanks!
I chose as the encoding method just plain .wav (ie not encoded).
I was getting ripping speeds of around 5.7 which I thought was a bit slow so I loaded up EAC and tried to rip it.
EAC instantly got around 9 - 10 for the same track.

I'm using Digital Large Buffer which I believe is your fastest rip setting.
Speed is set to Max, Type is: Auto Config.
THe drive is a Plextor: 124Tsi internal SCSI CDRW.
I'm on Win2k professional.

Any ideas?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[DocLotus]

Sounds interesting.  But, what is EAC?

[Alonso Nefarious]

Exact Audio Copy: A freeware program widly regarded as (one of?) the best rippers.  Features are very deep, and can be tweeked to the n-th degree.

FAQ, How-To, link to program:
http://www.chrismyden.com/nuke/modules.php?op=modload&name=Elite_DAE/eac&file=index

[Mysticeti]

Where abouts is that ASPII setting?

Thanks.

[nila]

It's in the Device settings in Options.
This works because I have a SCSI drive.
If you dont it might not be optimum for you.
Just test it and see.

EAC is the best ripper out there because of it's error correction algorithms.
It makes sure your rip is as perfect is possible for that CD in the condition it is in.

Secure Extraction mode in MJ sounds like it might do the same but I once asked in a shout if it did and got no reply so I'm not sure.
For older CD's EAC is the only option really to get as good a rip as possible.
The latest version has a MUCH better GUI than the older versions.

[JohnT]

Nila,
Here's a copy of an earlier post that compares EAC and MJ in secure mode:



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does MJ do equivalent error detection/correction to EAC?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


MJ has similarities to EAC in secure mode, but it's not equivalent. If you select the recommended secure mode in EAC with C2 error checking turned off (which is recommended by it's developer), here are some comparisons:
1. Both EAC and MJ read each sector at least twice and only continue if they're identical. If there is a discrepancy, I believe EAC then does up to 16 re-reads until it gets 8 identical reads. MJ does up to 16 re-reads, until it gets two consecutive identical reads. EAC will retry the 16 re-reads up to 1, 3, or 5 times depending on user choice, so it may read the same section up to 80 times. MJ only tries 16 times.

2. When MJ encounters unreadable sectors, it skips over them and then reports their locations at the end. The user can listen to the sections to see if the track is still acceptable, if not they can delete the track at that point. I believe EAC simply fails to copy the track if unreadable sectors are encountered (but I'm not sure).

3. MJ does not do anything special with drives that "cache" data. EAC can optionally reset the drive after each read in order to empty the cache. This can be very slow to the point of being unfeasible on some cdrom drives, but it will definitely give more "secure" results. I don't know the percentage of drives on the market that do caching which affects digital extraction, but I think it's fairly low.

4. In my testing, the speed of extraction was roughly comparable between EAC and MJ.

- John T.
JRiver, Inc.

[JohnT]

Nila,

Ideally, with "auto config" set, MJ should have detected that your drive was SCSI and automatically selected the aspi interface instead of the direct Win32 access method. If you have the time, I could send you a diagnostic program that might tell me why the wrong type was chosen. My email is johnt@jriver.com. If you don't want to mess with it, I understand.
Thanks.

[Alonso Nefarious]

JohnT >I believe EAC simply fails to copy the track if unreadable sectors are encountered (but I'm not sure).

EAC does not fail if it can't get a good read. It chooses the most likely result and writes the track and also logs & shows the error positions.  Every time I listen to the "suspicious" sections written with EAC I can't find a fault.

One other major difference is that EAC allows you to calibrate the drive so that you get the whole track.  Turns out that almost all drives don't quite start or stop reading at the beginning or end of the track, so there are often sectors missing.  With EAC you can calibrate the drive to get the whole thing.

-Nef

[JohnT]

I wasn't talking about a "suspicious" read though (where the bytes don't match), I was talking about a hard error where one or more sectors are totally unreadable. Not sure if EAC continues on after this.

As far as calibration, I think we're talking about one or two sectors at the beginning or end of a track. This amounts to about 1/100 second so I don't think it's a major issue. But if I'm wrong, we could look at adding this in the next version.