Products            Buy            Support Forum            Professional            About            Codec Central
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Can bad C2 and constant re-ripping of frames have any adverse effects?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Can bad C2 and constant re-ripping of frames have any adverse effects?

    I have an external Lite-On DX-20A4PU DVD drive and am using dbpoweramp registered r13.2. When I first set up the drive, I used the settings listed on this page: http://www.dbpoweramp.com/cd-ripper-setup-guide.htm. Cache was left at 1024kb. After running the C2 test, it appeared that the drive supported C2 pointers, so I checked that option.

    While ripping, I found that the drive often failed "pass 1," entered a second pass in ultra-secure mode, and then had to re-rip frames. It had to do this for at least a couple of tracks on EVERY CD I tried, even if the CD was totally brand new and scratch-free. I then started to notice some patterns - the number of frames to re-rip was often exactly 6 or 12 if the CD was relatively short (what are the chances that it would have to re-rip the exact same number of frames on so many different tracks on different CDs?). For longer CDs closer to 80 minutes, the number of frame re-rips would increase for tracks at the end of the disc, and it would have to re-rip 100s of frames (but never over a couple hundred).

    The constant frame re-rips were taking a long time, but they were resulting in accurate rips. I got impatient and decided to see if I would get accurate results in burst mode for these problematic tracks. This is exactly what happened. For tracks that were taking forever with ultra secure mode and c2 pointers enabled, I was getting the exact same rips with burst mode - verified by accuraterip. This didn't really make sense to me - if I could get accurate results in burst mode, it seems that I should have been able to get accurate results from "pass 1" rips in ultra-secure mode without having to do additional passes and frame re-rips. Something was clearly wrong.

    Anyway, after playing around with the settings, I concluded that my drive doesn't handle c2 pointers very well. I turned off c2, and found that the issue of frame re-rips totally went away even when using ultra-secure mode. Now, it almost never has to do an additional ultra-secure pass as "pass 1" always matches accuraterip.

    I ripped a fair number of discs with this crappy C2 support. They all matched accuraterip in the end, but the log files are all pretty long and messy on account of the high number of frame re-rips that had to be done for each disc. My question is, is there any chance that the bad c2 support and constant frame re-rips had an adverse effect on the integrity of the ripped files? Or am I basically okay if the files matched the accuraterip database, regardless of what happened during the ripping process?

    In other words, is it fair to say that bad c2 support and excessive frame re-rips have no negative effects other than making the ripping process take a lot longer than it should?

    Thanks for any thoughts!
    Last edited by imagnrywar; 06-06-2009 at 03:33 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2002

    Re: Can bad C2 and constant re-ripping of frames have any adverse effects?

    Not if AccurateRip verified no.

    It seems as though for your drive c2 should not be used (c2 should never report errors which are not there).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts