IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

9 Pages V  « < 7 8 9  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
CUETools DB
greynol
post Nov 15 2013, 19:27
Post #201





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



I would hope that further development will go in the direction of calculating ARv2 hashes for alternate pressings using AR offset hashes when a match cannot be made against an ARv1 hash. This secondary step could be a user-configurable option.

New releases are likely only in the AR database with v2 hashes. AFAIK this means that pressings from new releases not yet in the AR database will only hit the CTDB if they are ripped with CUERipper or with EAC that is configured to use the CTDB plugin.

I'm not sure what kind of time Gregory has to spend on this, but I imagine it could be knocked-out in a couple of hours at most. It's definitely more consistent with core thrust of his development than metadata.

I suggest ebz777 solicit spoon and someone to develop a third-party plugin for EAC, or Andre Wiethoff to incorporate it into his current project, assuming he isn't interested in doing so with EAC. This would be more productive than necro-bumping this idea that was shot-down a year ago.

Anyone who wishes to discuss acoustic IDs further should create a new topic. All future replies on the matter will be binned as off-topic. If there is any confusion as to what is on-topic, please refer back to the post that started this discussion.

This post has been edited by greynol: Nov 15 2013, 21:10


--------------------
Concern trolls: not a myth.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eleria
post Mar 10 2014, 18:19
Post #202





Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 23-January 10
Member No.: 77439



Hi, I got this error while verifying a rip to CTDB :
[CTDB TOCID: 2dFsnKg1uTph6lYwvtHK_pLgfkM-] database access error: Il existe une erreur dans le document XML (1, 1)..

While AR gave a normal response :
CODE
[AccurateRip ID: 00021a0a-000701e7-17039603] found.
Track   [  CRC   |   V2   ] Status
01     [b90d2469|b0d7967a] (11+06/17) Accurately ripped
02     [0135d72a|e733738e] (11+06/17) Accurately ripped
03     [f3e7fcf9|c8267af8] (13+06/19) Accurately ripped

Track Peak [ CRC32  ] [W/O NULL]
--  100,0 [B2CFA3FF] [725B254F]          
01  100,0 [D0B0E04E] [13D6A5BA]          
02   97,8 [C18821AC] [48F1C053]          
03  100,0 [E53C98FB] [1A21F364]
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sivadselim
post Mar 10 2014, 18:29
Post #203





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 25-August 08
Member No.: 57496



QUOTE (eleria @ Mar 10 2014, 11:19) *
Hi, I got this error while verifying a rip to CTDB :
[CTDB TOCID: 2dFsnKg1uTph6lYwvtHK_pLgfkM-] database access error: Il existe une erreur dans le document XML (1, 1)..

Yep, same, here.

"database access error: There is an error in XML document (1, 1).."
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Mar 10 2014, 18:35
Post #204





Group: Developer
Posts: 697
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



Thanks for letting me know, should be fixed now.


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sivadselim
post Mar 10 2014, 18:41
Post #205





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 25-August 08
Member No.: 57496



QUOTE (Gregory S. Chudov @ Mar 10 2014, 11:35) *
Thanks for letting me know, should be fixed now.



Thank you for CUETools! smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
remenor
post Jul 10 2014, 20:30
Post #206





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 10-July 14
Member No.: 116645



I copied a CD with EAC (AR confidence 1, CTDB 1) secure mode -without C2- but the last track did not match AR or with CTDB. The results were automatically sent to CTDB (even though there was error correction by EAC, in this track)
Then I tried to rip that track in 'Secure Mode + C2' : EAC showed several suspicious positions, who obviously failed to correct. The results were not sent to CTDB.
I tried ripping with CueRipper (Secure Mode) which showed error correction on that track... Also, the results were sent to CTDB.
Finally, I tried dBpoweramp, but 'ultrasecure ripping' warned suspicious positions (10 of 11 ; 9 of 11; etc) in various sectors.

The rips with the 3 programs show error correction, but get the same CRC (same unit, same chipset: no guarantees of 'perfection') however the results are sent to CTDB. Can be configured (CueRipper or CTDB plugin) to send only manually or in case of rips secure (without rereading due to errors) ?
Now there are 3 submissions (in CTDB), 2 mine... probably no secure (1 of EAC, 1 of CueRipper)
Can be eliminate at least one of those submissions?
Thanks!

P.S: I tried to fix with CTDB (confidence 1) but that rip does not match AR (confidence 1). So, any of all or none will be fine
Sorry for my english
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Jul 10 2014, 20:35
Post #207





Group: Developer
Posts: 697
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



It's ok. CTDB or AR entries with confidence 1 are never secure. You will only know which version is correct when a few other people will get the same result.

UPD: greynol pointed out that my statement is unclear, so let me explain what i mean by that.

Neither CTDB nor AR make any significant guarantees about the quality of a single submission. They cannot make those guarantees for a number of reasons: existence of undetectable ripping errors, drives that don't report errors with caches that aren't being defeated by the ripping program, CDr copies made with errors etc. We could introduce stricter submission rules, that would require people to use known-good CD drives, software that would protect against virtual CD drives, CD-R detection, etc, but that's not the path that was chosen.

Any single result in the database can be wrong. It's only useful to you when somebody elses result matches your own result. In that case, it doesn't really matter how those results were obtained and how many times the ripping software had to reread - the idea of AR/CTDB is that the fact of CRCs matching is assumed to be the best protection against ripping errors.

This post has been edited by Gregory S. Chudov: Jul 10 2014, 21:17


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Jul 11 2014, 01:43
Post #208





Group: Members
Posts: 1007
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235



Hi Grigory! I saw at your db page you offer a possibility to donate "to help cover hosting expenses"
I never saw you asking for help or money and want to ask here if this project is in danger!?

I still can't believe how well the magic works with repairing a broken cd rip! If you told me that 10 years ago...
I really want to miss it never more.
How much is it to get the "Don't write comment from CUE to tag" option?
One problem may be this bitcoin thing. I have no clue how to use it.
Keep up the great work!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Jul 11 2014, 03:34
Post #209





Group: Developer
Posts: 697
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



Surprisingly, Amazon's prices go down faster than the database grows, which is what i was hoping for when i chose AWS as a hosting platform. I used to pay about 70$ a month, now it's just barely above 30$.
I already forgot about this button. To be honest, i was just playing with bitcoin widget at the time smile.gif Don't worry about it.
I'm waiting till somebody (probably not me, because i'm out of ideas) will find a better solution to the comment tag problem. Because adding 999 options is not a sustainable way to develop a software product. EAC comments can be annoying too. "TOOL" tag would be better place for some of the stuff, but again ripping programs, encoders and cuetools would fight for the right to fill it. Tags are always such a mess i sometimes regret i support tags at all smile.gif


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Jul 11 2014, 03:51
Post #210





Group: Members
Posts: 1007
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235



Thanks for answering and fine to hear it is here to stay smile.gif These Tag thing is indeed a reason for some to make a hobby out of it and it must be a pita for developers i understand. I think i only asked because it worked up to version 2.1.2 the way i liked it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
remenor
post Jul 11 2014, 20:37
Post #211





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 10-July 14
Member No.: 116645



Thanks for your reply!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  « < 7 8 9
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd August 2014 - 12:54