| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sat, Jul 17th, 2010 @ 20:49 ( . ) |
I've mentioned this in some of my recent rip notes to you, but thought it would be a good idea to see if there's anything to discuss out here. I'm noticing that nibread 0.8.2 has trouble reading high tracks, particularly 30 onward, spitting out numerous errors. Dropping back to 0.8.0 quiets the errors. I also ran into this with the 0.7.x series until the last couple of editions came out. My ripping environment is: 1571 XAP cable Windows XP |
 | Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sat, Jul 17th, 2010 @ 21:01 ( . ) |
Yeah, it's strange. I get about 50/50 complaints about that, but the opposite. Some are telling me that 0.8.2 works and the earlier ones don't. :) Whichever is working better for you... |
| Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sat, Jul 17th, 2010 @ 21:09 ( . ) |
See if 0.8.3 fixes this problem for you. It's half and half between the two settings I was tweaking. |
| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sat, Jul 17th, 2010 @ 21:40 ( . ) |
083 seems to behave like 080--but I've seen some disks that 083/080 can't handle in *early* tracks without errors. Thunder Mountain Action Pak Vol 2 Side 1 that I'm scanning today exhibits that behavior: 080/083: Error on track 2, but reads 29+ fine 082: Errors on tracks 30+, but reads 2 fine. |
| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sat, Jul 17th, 2010 @ 21:49 ( . ) |
080/083 also seem more prone to "give up" and declare a track Unformatted than 082 is. |
| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sat, Jul 17th, 2010 @ 22:00 ( . ) |
Also note that 083 is still announcing itself as 082 (albeit with an updated compile time) when run. |
| Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 02:29 ( . ) |
Gotcha. Let's try one more time. Grab the latest. |
| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 12:29 ( . ) |
0842 is acting like 080/083 and doesn't like track 2. Attached. |
| Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 12:45 ( . ) |
That really looks like it's a legit error on that disk. Are you saying you can image it with another version and it never gets that error? |
| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 12:54 ( . ) |
Yes. With 082 I can rip track 2 successfully--at the cost of 30+ being wonky. Attached. |
| Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 12:47 ( . ) |
This track has a big chunk of missing data, intentional or not. I don't think this has anything to do with what I am tweaking. Never say never, though. FF FF 52 56 D5 29 52 7C DD D5 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 7F FF FF FF 55 D5 25 69 4A 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 94 E5 29 4A 53 54 A5 29 6D 52 94 A9 D6 B5 52 AF 5A D5 4A AD 6B 55 29 E9 52 D4 A9 5E B5 52 96 E5 29 4A 53 54 A5 29 4E 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 94 A5 B5 4A 52 AF 55 29 4A F4 D2 A5 2D 2A 6A 95 35 2A CA 55 A7 E9 A9 5E 94 A6 95 ED AB F3 54 A9 F9 4A 52 AB 54 A9 7D EF 7A D9 EF BD F7 A7 5E F6 BE 9A 7B D4 F9 6A BD 54 E5 A9 D9 53 94 9B D5 49 53 9D 95 A9 52 BD 64 A5 2D B9 6A 94 AB D5 4A 52 94 A5 29 4A 52 D4 B5 29 4A 52 94 A5 29 53 54 D5 35 4D 4A 52 94 A5 5D 57 55 D5 75 5D 57 52 95 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 54 A5 29 4A 4A 92 A5 29 4A 52 94 A5 29 AA 6A 9A A6 A9 4A 52 94 AF 2B CA F2 BC AF 2B CA 52 AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA 94 B5 49 4E 52 56 A9 29 CA 4A 92 A5 2D 52 53 94 95 AA 4A 72 9C A4 A9 4B 54 94 E5 25 6A 92 A4 A7 29 2A 52 D5 25 39 49 5A 96 A9 29 CA 4A 94 B5 49 4E 52 54 95 AA 4A 72 92 A5 2D 52 53 94 E5 25 6A 92 9C A4 A9 4B 54 A5 A5 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 6B AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA FF FF FF FF 52 57 D5 2D 52 7C DD D5 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 7F FF 7F FF FF FF FF 55 D4 AA D5 4A 6A 55 65 25 |
| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 13:06 ( . ) |
Here's another batch which may prove instructive about the impact of recent changes--three rips of Raw Recruit. The no-suffix version is 0842. It flips out on middle tracks. try2 is 0710. It breezes through the tracks 0842 didn't like but does the track 30+ weirdness. try3 is 080. It claims to be clean. |
| Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 13:12 ( . ) |
There has to be something else at work here. I often find the first read of a disk is full of errors, then another read is fine, like the disk jacket is cleaning the surface. Can you try the 0842 again on that Raw Recruit disk to be sure? 082 is screwed, don't test that version. |
| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 13:26 ( . ) |
then another read is fine, like the disk jacket is cleaning the surface.
: : Can you try the 0842 again on that Raw Recruit disk to be sure? Yeah, looks like you nailed it, this is a clean 0842 read of that disk. |
| Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 13:28 ( . ) |
Doing a big batch of disks like you are can be frustrating with the drive heads getting dirty all the time. With bad batches, I sometimes have to just leave the top cover off and clean after every other disk or when I start to get errors. :) Nevertheless, since there are two people testing the newer versions (one reading and one writing) I am trying to get it stabilized. I'll put up 0.8.5 here soon that will correct another issue with E2's on read. |
| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 13:39 ( . ) |
On 07/18/2010 @ 13:28, Pete Rittwage wrote With bad batches, I sometimes have to just leave the top cover off and clean after every other disk or when I start to get errors. :)
Yeah, cover is off and I have indeed had to clean after a dozen or so sides in some cases. Nevertheless, since there are two people testing the newer versions (one reading and one writing) I am trying to get it stabilized. I'll put up 0.8.5 here soon that will correct another issue with E2's on read. Funny you should mention, I just got a single E2 on both sides of a (clean-looking) copy of Remote Control. |
| Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 13:56 ( . ) |
It shouldn't be a defective image read in, just defective error detection. |
| Author: | Jason Compton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 14:42 ( . ) |
I'll still sit tight. I'm living in fear that you're going to be sending me e-mail asking me to re-rip the first 100 sides I sent you or something... |
| Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 16:27 ( . ) |
Grab 0.8.5, it should be back to normal settings. |
| Author: | jcompton (guest: search) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 17:24 ( . ) |
/files/nibtools is still showing 0.8.4. |
| Author: | Pete Rittwage (registered user: 558 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 17:33 ( . ) |
Fixed |
 | Author: | hyper active (registered user: 296 posts ) |
|---|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, Jul 18th, 2010 @ 22:27 ( . ) |
I'm starting to think that it's a drive head or a drive issue rather than a nibtools issue. I have a pretty good quality 1541, and Unlike a lot of people I've kept all my disks in a box in their individual jackets, and they still work. Perhaps a 1571 drive is not the best device for ripping disks. |