EAC speed with different drives

shadowlord

shadowlord

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 6, 2005
Messages
3,109
I just noticed that i have a large difference in speed with which EAC rips my CDs.

all 3 drives are in like new condition

pioneer s18lbk ... rips at ~7,5x speed
LG GH22LS ... rips at ~ 3x speed
older LG IDE drive ... rips at ~3x speed

i assume the pioneer is the best drive of the bunch to rip CDs but it has a strange problem.
sometimes after the ripping process the drive simply disappears in windows and can't be used again until a restart.
are LG drives really that bad CD ripping drives ?
any suggestion for a more reliable drive?
 
i was looking into this when i made all the orders for my new build, and i couldn't find much of anything current (just lots of reminiscing about the good old days of the "true" plextor), especially because i wanted a sata drive. i saw generally positive reviews of the samsung (SH-S223C) unit i eventually bought (nothing EAC specific), and i'll update this when everything is up and running and i know how much EAC does or doesn't like my drive.
 
It might be the discs, unless you tested ripping with the same disc. I've had discs rip in as little as 15 minutes, and other discs that took 60 minutes+. The drives I ripped with are the NEC ND-3520A (ide) and Samsung SH-S223F (sata). I just bought a 223L to replace the 223f since something broke or something and it no longer rips or burns :/
 
zero, please let us know how well the samsung works with EAC.

the pioneer does a great job at ripping, but that it sometimes simply disappears from windows is very annoying. (But i think that it may be somthing EAC related)
 
Installed my SH-S223L:
eac.png
 
:D

anyway, i think it was $25 from newegg with free shipping. dunno if it's still free shipping or not though if you're interested in picking one up.
 
it's (nearly) official, EAC likes this drive. it crunched through my most horrible scratched up disc in 3 hours last night -- accurate rip wouldn't sign off, but everything plays fine (prior to this i have never been able to rip this disc into a playable format)...and chewed through a normal disc in about 10 minutes. (max ~12.5x min ~8.5x)

EAC.png
 
People still use Secure with EAC? Wow... after years of doing that myself I finally gave up on it, and I highly recommend that people using EAC consider it. Burst Mode gets the job done much faster, and... amazingly... with the exact same data, as verified by the checksums.

As long as the discs are in good condition, you're going to "rip" the same data regardless of Burst or Secure, but Secure is just so damned slow overall. I've done thousands upon thousands of rips and I just got sick of waiting. I did testing - as I highly recommend you do as well - and discovered that with a good reader that the checksums match regardless of the ripping method (Burst/Paranoid/Secure). Verified this again using AccurateRip across 30+ CDs and it was always spot on.

I use Plextor CD drives, they're old but they still work, an old 12/10/32A model I bought around 2002 or so, it's never failed on me so I keep using it.

And of course, the most important aspect of all:

Take care of the damned CDs... :)

So many people don't keep 'em in anything protective at all, stacked on top of each other, or take them out in places in those massive CD holders that are simply not good for 'em (dust/dirt/etc gets inside those liners and when the disc is slid in and out, scratch scratch scratch, never fails).

Just a suggestion but, if your CDs are in great shape with no apparent physical damage, try using Burst Mode sometime and still do a check with AccurateRip - I'll bet you get the same exact results in far less time.

Of course, on badly damaged discs, Secure is useful but I've found (again, in testing) that Paranoid works better, and a bit faster, oddly enough.
 
you won't get 100% log scores if you dont rip in secure mode :)
 
Bahamut said:
Burst Mode gets the job done much faster, and... amazingly... with the exact same data, as verified by the checksums.
Click to expand...
EAC's test & copy checksums aren't useful in that respect. They don't indicate a good rip or a bad rip, just two consistent rips (or, more specifically, consistent test reads and copy reads). It could be consistently bad or consistently good. So, yes, you're getting the same data if the checksums match, but it could be bad data, i.e. not the desired data.

Only with AR can you confirm that a rip is good (or bad) against others with some degree of statistical significance.
 
based on the recommendations here i bought the Samsung S223L last week.
The speed with EAC is great. About 12x

So i wonder if the Samsung is simply a better drive then my LG GH22LS which only rips at 3x?
 
On my LG blu Ray drive it is under 1X for secure, under 2X for burst. Some reading shows me this is a common problem. Looking for a new ripper.
 
Plextor Ultraplex is still really fast with EAC although probably not a practical choice.
 
my samsung is still working great.
but anyone else noticed problems with EAC v.1 ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top