Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

cdparanoia toc does not agree with cdrdao-toc, cd-paranoia also reports different (but better) lengths #175

Closed
MerlijnWajer opened this issue Jun 15, 2017 · 14 comments
Labels
Accepted Accepted issue on our roadmap Bug Generic bug: can be used together with more specific labels Upstream Bug The issue is a result of an upstream bug

Comments

@MerlijnWajer
Copy link
Collaborator

CD UPC: 094635010220
Seems to be this CD: https://mojim.com/tw104790x1.htm

I will make a cue/bin copy of it for later analysis, but it causes failures when ripping the last track, since cdparanoia and cdrdao do not agree on the track length. cd-paranoia gets is more right, seemingly? (Need to verify that this holds true)

cdrdao

Cdrdao version 1.2.3 - (C) Andreas Mueller <andreas@daneb.de>
/dev/sr0: ATAPI iHAS124   F	Rev: CL9E
Using driver: Generic SCSI-3/MMC - Version 2.0 (options 0x100000)

Reading toc data...

Track   Mode    Flags  Start                Length
------------------------------------------------------------
 1      AUDIO   0      00:00:00(     0)     03:17:71( 14846)
 2      AUDIO   0      03:17:71( 14846)     04:09:35( 18710)
 3      AUDIO   0      07:27:31( 33556)     03:40:42( 16542)
 4      AUDIO   0      11:07:73( 50098)     03:53:01( 17476)
 5      AUDIO   0      15:00:74( 67574)     04:00:40( 18040)
 6      AUDIO   0      19:01:39( 85614)     03:38:31( 16381)
 7      AUDIO   0      22:39:70(101995)     05:18:14( 23864)
 8      AUDIO   0      27:58:09(125859)     03:23:64( 15289)
 9      AUDIO   0      31:21:73(141148)     03:05:34( 13909)
10      AUDIO   0      34:27:32(155057)     03:19:05( 14930)
11      AUDIO   0      37:46:37(169987)     03:47:22( 17047)
Leadout AUDIO   0      41:33:59(187034)

cdparanoia

cdparanoia -Q
cdparanoia III release 10.2 (September 11, 2008)

 

Table of contents (audio tracks only):
track        length               begin        copy pre ch
===========================================================
  1.    14846 [03:17.71]        0 [00:00.00]    no   no  2
  2.    18710 [04:09.35]    14846 [03:17.71]    no   no  2
  3.    16542 [03:40.42]    33556 [07:27.31]    no   no  2
  4.    17476 [03:53.01]    50098 [11:07.73]    no   no  2
  5.    18040 [04:00.40]    67574 [15:00.74]    no   no  2
  6.    16381 [03:38.31]    85614 [19:01.39]    no   no  2
  7.    23864 [05:18.14]   101995 [22:39.70]    no   no  2
  8.    15289 [03:23.64]   125859 [27:58.09]    no   no  2
  9.    13909 [03:05.34]   141148 [31:21.73]    no   no  2
 10.    14930 [03:19.05]   155057 [34:27.32]    no   no  2
 11.    28447 [06:19.22]   169987 [37:46.37]    no   no  2
 13.       31 [00:00.31]   332819 [73:57.44]    no   no  2
TOTAL  198465 [44:06.15]    (audio only)

cd-paranoia (libcdio)

cdparanoia III release 9.8 libcdio 0.83 x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
(C) 2001 Monty <monty@xiph.org> and Xiphophorus
(C) 2004, 2005, 2008 Rocky Bernstein <rocky@gnu.org>

Report bugs to bug-libcdio@gnu.org


Table of contents (audio tracks only):
track        length               begin        copy pre ch
===========================================================
  1.    14846 [03:17.71]        0 [00:00.00]    no   no  2
  2.    18710 [04:09.35]    14846 [03:17.71]    no   no  2
  3.    16542 [03:40.42]    33556 [07:27.31]    no   no  2
  4.    17476 [03:53.01]    50098 [11:07.73]    no   no  2
  5.    18040 [04:00.40]    67574 [15:00.74]    no   no  2
  6.    16381 [03:38.31]    85614 [19:01.39]    no   no  2
  7.    23864 [05:18.14]   101995 [22:39.70]    no   no  2
  8.    15289 [03:23.64]   125859 [27:58.09]    no   no  2
  9.    13909 [03:05.34]   141148 [31:21.73]    no   no  2
 10.    14930 [03:19.05]   155057 [34:27.32]    no   no  2
 11.    17047 [03:47.22]   169987 [37:46.37]    no   no  2
 13.       31 [00:00.31]   332819 [73:57.44]    no   no  2
TOTAL  187065 [41:34.15]    (audio only)
@MerlijnWajer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cdparanoia indeed tries to rip 6 minutes of data, but fails halfway. Suggesting that it indeed gets the toc wrong.

@carnager
Copy link

carnager commented Jul 1, 2017

try cdparanoia with the overread patches

@RecursiveForest
Copy link
Contributor

That's fascinating. Do you know why cd-paranoia (libcdio) is reporting 31 frames as track 13, but cdrdao reports them as part of the leadout? Is there an entry for track 13 in the lead-in Q subchannel data?

What does EAC say?

@JoeLametta
Copy link
Collaborator

@MerlijnWajer

cd-paranoia (libcdio)

Don't know if it changes the outcome but keep in mind that you're using an ancient version of that software. (Latest tagged one being: cdparanoia III release 10.2 libcdio 0.94)

@MerlijnWajer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I am not so sure if the overread patches matter. But I have confirmed that cd-paranoia (from libcdio) seems to get it right every time where cdparanoia gets it wrong. Have about 7 CDs that exhibit this problem.

Have not tried it with EAC. Can share some copies of the CDs?

libcdio gets it right, so I don't think the matter necessarily matters here.

@MerlijnWajer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I have code to switch between implementations. Will try to commit that soon.

@RecursiveForest
Copy link
Contributor

Sharing copies of the CD = the fast way to get my eyes on a problem. I also don't mind spending some money to buy copies if we can't bin/cue/write them easily.

@RecursiveForest
Copy link
Contributor

regarding switching, is that something we want to be togglable at the user level, or should we just force the switch? I can see good cases for both.

@MerlijnWajer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I have about 9 more in my possession for at least another week, and copies of several of them. The solution was simply to switch to libcdio cd-paranoia, as it does get it correctly. I at this point see little use in staying with cdparanoia.

@MerlijnWajer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

MerlijnWajer commented Aug 14, 2017

I would go for something like --cdparanoia-implementation <bin-name> and default to libcdio-cdparanoia?

@RecursiveForest
Copy link
Contributor

I am also convinced that a switch to cd-paranoia is the right thing to do, although having an interim period where we allow fallback to cdparanoia might ease the transition / help sort out bugs. I'm not sure if adding even more complexity / more runtime options is good long term though, which is why I wouldn't want such a flag to stay around forever. I'd be happy with it if we had a concrete milestone after which we would drop --cdparanoia-implementation.

I still want to keep this issue open because right now we're still planning on using cdrdao for reading the toc, and places where it differs from cd-paranoia are important.

@JoeLametta
Copy link
Collaborator

I'd be happy with it if we had a concrete milestone after which we would drop --cdparanoia-implementation.

Maybe we can schedule it for milestone 2.0?

I am not so sure if the overread patches matter.

It still seems to be something useful even for cd-paranoia (libcdio): see here.

@JoeLametta
Copy link
Collaborator

Shall I close this one? (because of #213).

@JoeLametta JoeLametta added the Bug Generic bug: can be used together with more specific labels label Apr 6, 2018
@JoeLametta JoeLametta added On Hold Waiting for other actions Needed: discussion More discussion needed before anything can be done (or still no agreement has been reached) Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon labels Nov 13, 2018
@JoeLametta JoeLametta added the Upstream Bug The issue is a result of an upstream bug label Nov 28, 2019
@JoeLametta
Copy link
Collaborator

Closed because of #213.

@JoeLametta JoeLametta added Accepted Accepted issue on our roadmap and removed Needed: discussion More discussion needed before anything can be done (or still no agreement has been reached) On Hold Waiting for other actions Status: stale Issue will be considered inactive soon labels Dec 4, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Accepted Accepted issue on our roadmap Bug Generic bug: can be used together with more specific labels Upstream Bug The issue is a result of an upstream bug
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants