> > > If a recorder has (claims to have) Burn-proof capability, it would be nice > > to run the burner at normal priority and with a small fifo, since the only > > drawback would be slightly slower burning. > > > Slower burning is not the only drawback. If you try to burn a cd at full > capacity and the burn proof has to be used several times, the data won't > fit. This has happened me with an external freecom. I don't know is > newer recorders don't do this little separation when starting again.
Hmmm. I'm rather surprised by that. My understanding was that Burn-Proof was supposed to work without requiring the addition of link blocks, and that it's supposed to be seamless enough that most audio-CD players are able to play right through the transition without losing PLL lock on the data. I can see that if you were trying to push a disc all the way to 100% of its capacity, that the loss of even one or two blocks' worth of data might cause a problem. I always try to limit the burns to a few megabytes less than 100%, just to make sure. > > Perhaps this could be a flag, then if the user selected that option any > > problems would clearly be of his/her own making. Would it even need a flag? The speed, FIFO size, and use of Burn-Proof are already available as command-line options. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
