|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | =Introduction=
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I wanted to test EAC’s secure mode, old secure mode (Paranoid), CDex’s Paranoia implementation at recovering errors to do this with accurate results I first needed to find a drive which 1. Does not jitter & 2. Does not cache (or buffer) audio data because these things make accurate error recovery more complicated & currently CDex does not support drives which cache audio & jitter. My Pioneer 106s was my most suited drive so chose it for the test. Second I needed to find a CD with a track that had unrecoverable errors I chose a pressed CD with light & heavy scratches that I had lying around.. I would later need to clean the CD to create a reference copy of the track.
| |
| − |
| |
| | ==Conditions== | | ==Conditions== |
| | | | |
| Line 25: |
Line 21: |
| | | | |
| | Track was ripped with each program, I then cleaned the CD & extracted the track with my Lite-on 811s using EAC secure mode & test & copy (achieved a CRC match) which I used as a reference file. I then bit compared each track from each extraction program against the reference file using foobar. | | Track was ripped with each program, I then cleaned the CD & extracted the track with my Lite-on 811s using EAC secure mode & test & copy (achieved a CRC match) which I used as a reference file. I then bit compared each track from each extraction program against the reference file using foobar. |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Results==
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ===Error Reporting Results===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ''Under Construction''
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ===Error Recovery Results===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | EAC was best at recovering errors, CDex was at a close second & EAC's old secure mode (Paranoid) was worst.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | <center>[[Image:EACvsCDex001.png|center|600px|EAC Secure vs CDex Paranoia vs EAC Paranoid]]</center>
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | EAC's old secure mode (Paranoid) was the fastest, CDex came second & EAC's secure mode last
| |
| − |
| |
| − | <center>[[Image:EACvsCDex002.png|center|600px|EAC Secure vs CDex Paranoia vs EAC Paranoid]]</center>
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Conclusion==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | '''EAC’s secure mode''' had the least amount of errors making it best at recovering errors but difference wasn't large between EAC's secure mode & CDex Paranoia, Full. I believe the differences in scores are due to the amount of read-retries the program commands the drive to take.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | '''CDex's Paranoia, Full''' did very well & the test has shown that when using a supported drive (a drive that doesn't cache audio or jitter) CDex does in fact report not corrected errors & is a good compromise between speed/quality for recovering errors.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | '''EAC's old secure mode (Paranoid)''' was the fastest & may be helpful for highly damaged CD's because of it's speed but should be avoided if you want accuracy.
| |
Revision as of 03:30, 9 October 2005
Conditions
Drive used was a Pioneer 106s DVD-ROM with PIO transfer mode set to disable the drives audio caching
The software & setting I used were,
EAC V0.95pb5
- Secure Mode
- No disable Cache (no correction used)
- Yes Accurate Stream (no correction used)
- No C2
EAC V0.95pb5
- Paranoid mode
- No disable cache
CDex V1.51
Track was ripped with each program, I then cleaned the CD & extracted the track with my Lite-on 811s using EAC secure mode & test & copy (achieved a CRC match) which I used as a reference file. I then bit compared each track from each extraction program against the reference file using foobar.
