|
Image Creating and Burning
|
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. September 2010 @ 21:21 |
Link to this message
|
Could it still be in your trash can?
What were your steps? Rip, make an image with burrrn then burn it? Or was this the old disk? I can tell you with videos I get a 25-30% coaster rate with Nero but using imgburn with the same image less than 5% coaster rate on the same image Nero choked on. Nero creates 5-6 time the coaster. Nero did not make the image. I really hate that app. It does do laser scribe labels. I do like that feature. Some times I screw up and burn with Nero then I have to cross my fingers will it die?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. September 2010 @ 21:47 |
Link to this message
|
No I do not think that will help at all. dbPA is subscription based. It doesn't die on your side it dies on the website when you request services. It is quite clever how they do it. However accurip is not a paid for subscription right now. I suspect you can't get the 30 day version since you already have it installed.
Also your CD must be in the accurip database for it to work. I may say "not in the accurip database". It will add yours check sums to its database. I don't know how many matching sessions it needs before it will not give the error message.
|
Member
|
9. September 2010 @ 23:47 |
Link to this message
|
labtec99 wrote,
Quote:
By the way, did you know that when burning flac files using Burrrn that it needs to decode the Flac files first to Wave before it starts to burn, and it's the Wave files that it,s burning, so in essence the music is being converted twice prior to being burned
Yes they are decoded/decompressed, but they are NOT being converted...There will be NO further quality loss...If you un-zip a word doc, is it not decompressed to it's original bit for bit format?..Same thing with flac, that's why it's well--lossless
All burning apps decode to wav first and then burn..Burrrn does it on-the-fly..
As for your burning issue(s), if you stick to using EAC or dBpoweramp for ripping, coupled with a reliable burner and equally reliable media, then you'll have better error-free burns..I for one never burn at the slowest rated speed of the disc(s)..I use Pioneer and Optiarc drives and am very pleased with the results, and as stated b-fore, can't remember last time I had a coaster, err freesbie..
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. September 2010 @ 23:58
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. September 2010 @ 09:05 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by k00ka:
Yes they are decoded/decompressed, but they are NOT being converted...There will be NO further quality loss...If you un-zip a word doc, is it not decompressed to it's original bit for bit format?..Same thing with flac, that's why it's well--lossless
All burning apps decode to wav first and then burn..Burrrn does it on-the-fly..
I hate to be a stickler, but lossless to lossless really is a conversion. Saying there is no conversion is an over simplification. You being an expert, will be quoted. How many times have you heard CDs store the music in wave files? That is not true and can muddy the waters. The CD format is a primitive lossless format like the wave file but it is not a wave file. There is even a conversion when you burn a wave file to a CD. I believe dbPA can actually rip to a CD format file. I think the format name is CDA (Compact Disc Audio). They are less primitive than a wave file because they hold check sums needed for optical reads which are not in wave files. I don't know why anyone would rip to CDAs. I don't think they are usable for anything. I don't think they are usable even in a normal audio burn process. I grimace saying all this because someone may try to be cool and build their on CD with CDA files which will probably not work because there is probably a bit more to an audio CD than just CDA files.
Same data but a different format. Think of the process like converting from one database table to another database of a different format. You just move the data from one shell to another. You do not expect a loss of data when you do that.
Sorry for getting so picky.
|
Member
|
10. September 2010 @ 10:21 |
Link to this message
|
Not picky at all..A case of semantics perhaps(in my case)..In my response I was simply addressing the OP's concern regarding quality loss..As you well know my friend, lossless is just that, lossless..So converting/transcoding from lossless> <lossless will result in no quality loss..And of course no loss when decoding/decompressing a lossless file back to wav prior to burning..
BTW, thanks for the compliment, I'm hardly an expert, but just love music and video stuff..I belong to a couple of other V/A forums, and unfortunately AD will not let me change my user-name w/o losing all my post count..
And from time to time, most if not all experts, will learn something everyday my friend..
Cheers!!..
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. September 2010 @ 10:24
|
|
labtec99
Junior Member
|
10. September 2010 @ 11:54 |
Link to this message
|
My version of Dbpoweramp version 10 only rips to wave plus others like flac, but it doesn't rip to .CDA (Compact Disc Audio)
Also like I say I can't have accurate rip enabled, does that mean I get rips but not as good as accurate rip?
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. September 2010 @ 12:09 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by k00ka:
I'm hardly an expert, but just love music and video stuff..I belong to a couple of other V/A forums, and unfortunately AD will not let me change my user-name w/o losing all my post count..
And from time to time, most if not all experts, will learn something everyday my friend..
Cheers!!..
No, you are an expert here make no doubt about that. As you know this forum is a very small pond. What is nice about it is morons like the one that wants to be able to play a play list without the music can post here and not get thrown off because there is no anti-moron clause like with the serious audio forums. The bad part is we do not have the experts like those forums they have to settle for what we have. Still, I have not seen much that wasn't handled well in many years even without varnull.
No one asks very technical questions here. She would handle them with ease.
Only dead and stupid persons do not learn. That reminds me of an old Chinese saying dear to my heart. Wise men learn more from fools than fools learn from wise men.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. September 2010 @ 12:10
|
|
labtec99
Junior Member
|
10. September 2010 @ 12:21 |
Link to this message
|
I have another writer now, and just thought to post the speed test, this time it went through without any errors.
By the way this new writer lets me burn at x4 and x8 which the LG didn't.
Does the test look not too bad?
DAE Quality
Quality 10
Accurate Stream Yes
Seek Times
Random 83 ms
1/3 92 ms
Full 170 ms
CPU Usage
1X 1 %
2X 2 %
4X 4 %
8X 7 %
Interface
Burst Rate 18249 KB/sec
Spin Up/Down Times
Spin Up Time 1.77 sec
Spin Down Time 1.94 sec
Load/Eject Times
Load Time 1.07 sec
Eject Time 1.68 sec
Recognition Time 9.98 sec
Log
Time Elapsed Action
[17:05:27] Starting Transfer Rate Test
[17:08:12] 2:44 Speed:5-39 X CAV (29.48 X average)
[17:08:12] Starting DAE Quality Test
[17:08:17] Total errors: 0 (0.000 %)
[17:08:17] DAE Quality: 10
[17:08:32] 0:21 Accurate Stream: Yes
[17:08:32] Starting Seek Times Test
[17:08:41] Random Seek: 83 ms
[17:08:50] 1/3 Seek: 92 ms
[17:09:07] 0:35 Full Seek: 170 ms
[17:09:07] Starting CPU Usage Test
[17:09:22] CPU usage at 1X: 1 %
[17:09:37] CPU usage at 2X: 2 %
[17:09:52] CPU usage at 4X: 4 %
[17:10:07] 1:00 CPU usage at 8X: 7 %
[17:10:07] Starting Burst Rate Test
[17:10:09] 0:02 Interface burst rate: 18 MB/sec (18249 KB/sec)
[17:10:09] Starting Spin-Up/Down Test
[17:10:15] Spin-up time: 1.77 seconds
[17:10:26] 0:16 Spin-down time: 1.94 seconds
[17:10:26] Starting Load/Eject Test
[17:10:27] Eject time: 1.68 seconds
[17:10:28] Load time: 1.07 seconds
[17:10:38] 0:13 Recognition time: 9.98 seconds
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. September 2010 @ 12:29
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. September 2010 @ 12:33 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by labtec99:
My version of Dbpoweramp version 10 only rips to wave plus others like flac, but it doesn't rip to .CDA (Compact Disc Audio)
Also like I say I can't have accurate rip enabled, does that mean I get rips but not as good as accurate rip?
Somehow I missed this.
Check dbpa codec central
Note CDA comes with dbPA by default. Maybe you are confused.
dbPA allows you to add up to about 30 some encoders from its web site. They warn against overloading with codecs you do not need. I have had dbPA for 5 yrs from maybe V7. You could always add as many codecs as they had while your subscription was good. I stopped paying because I am very poor right now and I have ripped all my CDs so I may rip a dozen or 2 a year now. No need to pay for a subscription. EAC is fine for my needs. I have discovered my subscription still works. Maybe after 5 yrs they give you one yr for free. I get error messages but I still get the metadata. Maybe it is coming from freedb but it is pointing to the paid for subscription. It allows you to use many sources to metadata and many codecs.
Accurip merely compares your CRC checks to the mean stored in their database as it adds your data to theirs. dbpa uses burst mode unless, which is quick and dirty unless accurip detects and error then it will cycle through various modes till it gets it right. If it can't use accurip it is inferior to EAC. I have needed to use EAC for something that was not in accurip and didn't come out right. The default mode for EAC is secure which is slower but more accurate. Normally that level of error checking is not necessary. Still for a test, dbpa should be pretty good even without accurip.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. September 2010 @ 12:48
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. September 2010 @ 12:58 |
Link to this message
|
We seem to be writing at the same time.
I have no idea why Nero is letting you alter the speed. I really doubt if anyone in that company knows how the speeds are picked. They used to have some smart guys but they left a long time ago.
The main reason I hate Nero is I got int a fight with the development manager about the speed issue. He blamed the speed choices on everything but Nero. I say if you want to burn at 1X you must have your reasons. He claimed the drive wouldn't let you. Except I had to burn apps that alowed you to pick any speed up to the max allowed by the blank. It is your computer and your blanks.
I will not use a burning app that tells me what my burn speed is.
Any reason you decided not to try imgburn. It is the most careful burn app on the market although it is shareware.
I do not pretend to be an expert to tell you if it is good. I have burned many thousand disks and I know what works for me. I guess if I had burner problems I might educate myself in that area.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. September 2010 @ 13:06
|
|
labtec99
Junior Member
|
10. September 2010 @ 13:23 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Mez:
We seem to be writing at the same time.
I have no idea why Nero is letting you alter the speed. I really doubt if anyone in that company knows how the speeds are picked. They used to have some smart guys but they left a long time ago.
The main reason I hate Nero is I got int a fight with the development manager about the speed issue. He blamed the speed choices on everything but Nero. I say if you want to burn at 1X you must have your reasons. He claimed the drive wouldn't let you. Except I had to burn apps that alowed you to pick any speed up to the max allowed by the blank. It is your computer and your blanks.
I will not use a burning app that tells me what my burn speed is.
Any reason you decided not to try imgburn. It is the most careful burn app on the market although it is shareware.
I do not pretend to be an expert to tell you if it is good. I have burned many thousand disks and I know what works for me. I guess if I had burner problems I might educate myself in that area.
Nero has always let the user change the speed settings just prior to the burn, but sometimes Nero only gives out certain speeds, but it obviously detects the info from the burner, the LG burner has from 16 to 48, this new Samsung writer allows even as low as x1 speed.
Reason I don't use imgburn is I am not too happy with shareware products, freeware but never shareware, I can't be bothered with the limitations.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. September 2010 @ 13:25
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. September 2010 @ 13:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
It is the burner app of choice not because it is free but because it is the best and free. I have donated money to the cause. Money wasn't an issue then.
Try it before you say you don't like it.
|
