fred7;195656 Wrote: 
> it is better than re-reading and possibly getting the same error - the
> rip can still be wrong but consistant

Can it?  From what I have seen of damaged CDs, EAC's estimate of where
the "suspect positions" are varies from rip to rip.  It's close, but
not identical.

When you think about a scratch, it's very possible that the same drive
won't be affected the same way by it twice just due to how small a
pit/land is versus the optical aberration a scratch creates.

The error would have to be identical down to the last single bit.  What
are the odds of that, even given that the "damage level" hasn't
changed?

I'm not trying to contradict you, I'm really just asking the question. 
I could be wrong here.


-- 
Mark Lanctot
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34232

_______________________________________________
ripping mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping

Reply via email to