Originally Posted by
Porcus
Some thoughts, which may be technically nonsense (I am not sure if I have understood correctly how AccurateRip works)
1) on backwards compatibility:
Is it a good idea to only submit the new one? Wouldn't it be better to submit both, and score the new-CRC up or down according to the accuracy of the old-CRC for the same rip? This would enable you to give a better estimate of accuracy for tracks with one or few new-CRC submissions.
I think one should pay attention to how much time it has taken to populate the AR database. The physical CD format is in decline (which on the other hand might increase the need for secure ripping, as those of us who care about sound quality will might buy second hand collections ...) If the number of AR submission grows exponentially at a high rate, then maybe an AR2 database will be useful in short time. Just think of it.
2) offset issues
2a) a "check this file" feature?
I know it would be hard to prevent multiple submissions though, but if you are to consider an update of AccurateRip, it might be worth to have this in mind. Ideally one should be able to do so even for rips with incorrect offset: take a folder with n wavs, process k CRCs corresponding to offset (takes time, but on user's computer ...), find one which matches, and use this offset to check the other files in the folder. At least it would help to confirm a lonely AR entry, and if one has to "adjust for offset" in the file, then one knows that it is not the same rip as the one in the database.
2b) store offset used?
More generally, a "file ripped with offset x" datapoint in the AR base would certainly require some bits, but if two files ripped with different offsets would match, then one is safer; they are not multiple entries if the same rip, and AFAIK not the same drive or model.
2c) different pressings?
And then: is this a way of dealing with different pressings? Are different pressings usually bit-identical up to different offsets? (Hm, I suspect they would also differ by pressing-specific bit errors, hence a need for secure ripping?)
A suggestion: Would it be an idea to store users' AR entries and lookups locally? (Voluntarily, for privacy reasons.) Could prevent multi-submissions.
Is that much? Not in terms of hard disc cost ...