PDA

View Full Version : ? for Mac Users


AAR.oner
2005-05-16, 04:52 PM
curious as to the general consensus of TTD's mac users re: CD extraction...

some people swear by iTunes [w/ error correction enabled], others say xACT is preferable...i've used both and never noticed a glitch with either, but tend to use xACT mostly...

any comments/opinions...lynne? other OSXers?

Washac
2005-05-16, 05:16 PM
Hi Ya

I have somebody in my family who does it all the time with iTunes, and they never moan to me that is does not work.

If I want tracks from a CD I just mount the CD, open the CD on Desktop and just drag the tracks that I want into a waiting folder, Never had any problems with that method either.


Washac

U2Lynne
2005-05-16, 05:58 PM
I've never taken a CDR and ripped it to be seeded here, I've always just seeded shows I already had in SHN/flac format.

However, I did do a couple of tests by using xACT to extract (actually, CDParanoia I think it's called) and iTunes with error correction on. I extracted a CDR using both methods and made md5s of both and they were exactly the same.

Washac, if you just drag/drop the files from your CD, they are .cda files and not .wav (or .aiff). When you did that, what did you do with the files afterwards?

AAR.oner
2005-05-16, 07:47 PM
thanks lynne and wash for yer imput...

lynne--i too rarely have to extract [now that most folks are trading in lossless data format :D ]...but i just got set of shows and they arrived in cdr format...so i'm stuck with extracting and then archiving in flac [i've of course made checksums for both the flac filles and the wavs...hopefully i can find someone with the same shows and compare the wav checksums] so far, no issues with either program though...

i'm just curious which program we should dub the "EAC of MAC", to set the benchmark for trading purposes...any other Mac traders with an opinion?

ffooky
2005-05-16, 09:24 PM
I'd say xACT because the error correction is superior (in my experience) to iTunes and you get an output log which informs you of any audible errors.

Washac
2005-05-17, 05:47 PM
I've never taken a CDR and ripped it to be seeded here, I've always just seeded shows I already had in SHN/flac format.

However, I did do a couple of tests by using xACT to extract (actually, CDParanoia I think it's called) and iTunes with error correction on. I extracted a CDR using both methods and made md5s of both and they were exactly the same.

Washac, if you just drag/drop the files from your CD, they are .cda files and not .wav (or .aiff). When you did that, what did you do with the files afterwards?

Nothing, I just tried it again.

Insert an official release CD.
Close iTunes.
Click on mounted CD in Desktop.
Then just the track/tracks out to Desktop or where you want them, they are just .aiff files.

I have only ever seen .cda files on a PC never on a Mac


Washac

AAR.oner
2005-05-18, 12:25 AM
I'd say xACT because the error correction is superior (in my experience) to iTunes and you get an output log which informs you of any audible errors.

ffooky's correct on this one...

just got a show in the mail that was in audio format...i noticed a scratch that ran with the disc's rotation...knowing it would cause some sort of "issue", i tried to extract with both programs...

xACT slowed down to a ridicuously low read rate, so i finally canceled extraction [ran for over an hour on just the first track]...

iTunes w/ error-correction extracted "without a problem"...

so i popped it into the PC and extracted with EAC...the log said there were issues with such and such sectors (a few seconds of music) on track 1...the rest of the tracks extracted fine

i went back & listened closely to the "problem section" in the iTunes extract, and there was a bit of mild distortion/warble...

so...i'd say this rules out iTunes in regard to accurate extraction [atleast for trading purposes]...guess i'll stick with xACT. ;)

AAR.oner
2005-05-22, 12:27 AM
Lynne...

i wonder if this http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/faq.php?faq=ripping#faq_itunes shouldn't be updated to xACT, due to iTunes "unreliablility" as posted above^^^

just a thought...

PaulHarald
2005-05-23, 07:31 PM
I have read so many places that it's virtually impossible to make a 100% perfect audio CD copy on a Mac, and actually not on a PC either even when using EAC.

But how about this: Copy the files (on a Mac) by dragging them from the CD to the desktop. The copied files are .aiff

Then either make .md5 checksum files and compare with the tracks on the CD or use the built-in binary "compare" mode in Toast which essentially does the same thing.

I have found this method of copying as well as using iTunes and xAct to be exactly the same - MANY times - EVERY time in fact.

When I burn a CD in DAO afterwards - I can compare the files again to be 100% the same.

What am I missing?

AAR.oner
2005-05-24, 12:28 AM
I have read so many places that it's virtually impossible to make a 100% perfect audio CD copy on a Mac, and actually not on a PC either even when using EAC.

But how about this: Copy the files (on a Mac) by dragging them from the CD to the desktop. The copied files are .aiff

Then either make .md5 checksum files and compare with the tracks on the CD or use the built-in binary "compare" mode in Toast which essentially does the same thing.

I have found this method of copying as well as using iTunes and xAct to be exactly the same - MANY times - EVERY time in fact.

When I burn a CD in DAO afterwards - I can compare the files again to be 100% the same.

What am I missing?


there's no extraction log that way...but other than that it's perfectly fine...even when encoding the aiff files to flac and back, yer aiff md5s will still check out

as far as iTunes goes, it seems to "decode thru the errors" whereas xACT does not...this rules iTunes out in my mind, atleast for trading/archiving purposes

U2Lynne
2005-05-24, 12:51 AM
as far as iTunes goes, it seems to "decode thru the errors" whereas xACT does not...this rules iTunes out in my mind, atleast for trading/archiving purposes
Yep, and I sent myself a note to change the FAQ. I just haven't had time yet.

AAR.oner
2005-05-24, 01:12 AM
Yep, and I sent myself a note to change the FAQ. I just haven't had time yet.

:thumbsup

PaulHarald
2005-05-24, 07:04 AM
Why do you need a log if the files are exactly the same? And I mean EXACTLY the same.

On a Mac, the files appear as .aiff on the CD so you can verify them against the copies on the hard drive. It's like copying a data disc really. Is it not that way on a PC and is that why there's so much fuss about CDs being copied perfectly and not?

Compare it to this: When we discuss copying DVDs, it's all about copying data and verifying with md5 checksum files for 100% perfection. No report, no EAC. What's the difference here?

Appreciate the input,

Wender

ffooky
2005-05-24, 10:13 AM
Why do you need a log if the files are exactly the same? And I mean EXACTLY the same.

On a Mac, the files appear as .aiff on the CD so you can verify them against the copies on the hard drive. It's like copying a data disc really. Is it not that way on a PC and is that why there's so much fuss about CDs being copied perfectly and not?

Compare it to this: When we discuss copying DVDs, it's all about copying data and verifying with md5 checksum files for 100% perfection. No report, no EAC. What's the difference here?

Appreciate the input,

Wender

I'm in the middle of a mammoth test of Finder/xACT/EAC and the results are pretty interesting so far.

Here's an example of why you need a log:

From an xACT log:

100% track 5 'Lithium' recorded with minor problems

100% 0 rderr, 0 skip, 12 atom, 0 edge, 0 drop, 0 dup, 0 drift

100% 324 overlap(0.5 .. 0.5)

The same track extracted by dragging from the Finder (OS X 10.3.9) produced an identical file but in EAC produced "suspicious positions". Without the log there would be no indicator of any problems...even things that are nigh on inextractable with EAC and produce what xACT describes as audible errors/major problems will copy across from Finder as quickly as normal. Unless you listen to everything you extract you would be unaware and could pass on unlistenably flawed tracks.

I'll have the results of my tests later today.

AAR.oner
2005-05-24, 02:06 PM
I'm in the middle of a mammoth test of Finder/xACT/EAC and the results are pretty interesting so far.

Here's an example of why you need a log:

From an xACT log:

100% track 5 'Lithium' recorded with minor problems

100% 0 rderr, 0 skip, 12 atom, 0 edge, 0 drop, 0 dup, 0 drift

100% 324 overlap(0.5 .. 0.5)

The same track extracted by dragging from the Finder (OS X 10.3.9) produced an identical file but in EAC produced "suspicious positions". Without the log there would be no indicator of any problems...even things that are nigh on inextractable with EAC and produce what xACT describes as audible errors/major problems will copy across from Finder as quickly as normal. Unless you listen to everything you extract you would be unaware and could pass on unlistenably flawed tracks.

I'll have the results of my tests later today.


:clap: :clap: this was what i had wanted to do but hadn't gotten around to...thanks for taking the time...

quick questions ffook--the results above show a "minor problem" [the "12 atom"]...i got some very similar results the other day using xACT...my ? is, what does the "atom" refer to? also the "324 overlap"? is this like a SBE, or something else??? also, would these "minor problems" be similar to an EAC log that reports a 99% Copy Quaity [generally viewed as an "acceptable" extraction], or should re-extraction be performed on the tracks with "minor problems"?

looking forward to yer findings...cheers!

AAR.oner
2005-05-24, 02:23 PM
Why do you need a log if the files are exactly the same? And I mean EXACTLY the same.

On a Mac, the files appear as .aiff on the CD so you can verify them against the copies on the hard drive. It's like copying a data disc really. Is it not that way on a PC and is that why there's so much fuss about CDs being copied perfectly and not?

Compare it to this: When we discuss copying DVDs, it's all about copying data and verifying with md5 checksum files for 100% perfection. No report, no EAC. What's the difference here?

Appreciate the input,

Wender

all in all wender, having an Extraction Log is simply important to some collectors/traders, including myself...now, some might argue that its superfluous, and for them it may be--but given the numerous "versions" of a show that can be found floating around in the "gene pool", the more info that can be passed on with a show, the better...

also, note ffooky's post above, another argument FOR xACt and extraction logs...

even if the "extra" info is unimportant to you, its very much appreciated by certain others in the community [and the # of "certain others" is quickly growing]...it might take an extra 2 mins MAX of yer time, and since this is really only going to be performed when a show is first seeded [or when receiving Audio CD formatted shows in trade and transferring them to lossless data for archiving--why people don't switch to only trading lossless data i'll never understand :hmm: ]

in all honesty, and for the good of the whole taping community, i really think shows should include ATLEAST:

--the audio tracks [flac/shn/etc]
--an extraction log
--a .wav md5 checksum
--a lossless checksum [ffp or md5]
--lineage/info text

but hey, maybe i'm just an anal audio snob who wants to know everything about a show... :rolleyes:

glad we can discuss all this though, need more Mac Techie discussions going on as our numbers are growing [bwahahahahahaha mr gates! bwahahahahaha!]

ffooky
2005-05-24, 04:08 PM
Blimey, I'm going cross-eyed here !! I've been ripping pretty much all day.

I've come to the conclusion that "atom" numbers after repeated extractions are likely to be bad news. Anything with them causes 5+ red lines in EAC's little indicator and leads to sync/read errors or at best "suspicious positions".

Yes, you should try again if you get "minor problems"...a lot of tracks I came across with those today were successful on the second attempt.

My big problem has been finding discs that are not too heavily damaged but from what I've found the Finder is pretty good but definitely not reliable. I tried multiple extractions with two different drives and on occasions both of them would produce non-matching results from the same tracks, though the differences were at most 5 samples.

The most remarkable result I got was:

100% track 7 'Track07' recorded successfully
100% 0 rderr, 0 skip, 0 atom, 0 edge, 0 drop, 0 dup, 0 drift
100% 1131 overlap(0.5 .. 0.5)

This 18:30 track had plenty of 1 or 2 lines of red lights during EAC extraction and I'm now pretty sure that "overlaps" are re-reads. The remarkable thing was that I got a matching extraction from the Finder. My second attempt differed by 5 samples but the fact that Finder could produce an exact match for what took xACT 1131 overlaps and EAC plenty of red bars suggests to me that some form of correction must take place, even though the transfer from disc to HD is much quicker than either of the DAE programs.

Tracks with "atom" numbers after repeated extractions always produced non-matching rips with multiple extractions from the Finder but as I said before, you're pretty much screwed with them anyway.

I think the bottom line is that though dragging to the desktop can produce perfect results with undamaged discs, one has absolutely no way of knowing if any errors have occurred. If someone is determined to use that method I'd recommend making (at least) two full extractions and comparing them with Toast, shntool, 'diff' in the Terminal or by making MD5s for one set and running that against the second.

U2Lynne
2005-05-24, 05:02 PM
I think the bottom line is that though dragging to the desktop can produce perfect results with undamaged discs, one has absolutely no way of knowing if any errors have occurred. If someone is determined to use that method I'd recommend making (at least) two full extractions and comparing them with Toast, shntool, 'diff' in the Terminal or by making MD5s for one set and running that against the second.
Maybe this is a stupid question, *but*, why can't you make an md5 of the contents on the disc and then drag/drop the contents to your hard drive and then run the md5 on the files you just made on your drive? Wouldn't that tell you that you successfully copied the files over.

I do like the idea of a logfile though.

ffooky
2005-05-24, 05:24 PM
Maybe this is a stupid question, *but*, why can't you make an md5 of the contents on the disc and then drag/drop the contents to your hard drive and then run the md5 on the files you just made on your drive? Wouldn't that tell you that you successfully copied the files over.

I do like the idea of a logfile though.

You can't make an MD5 (or any checksum) of audio disc tracks with any utility I've tried, which pretty neatly illustrates the fact that although the Finder displays audio CD tracks as AIFFs, they ain't.

U2Lynne
2005-05-24, 05:49 PM
I just did it with xACT. Something to note.... it took three minutes to get a traditional md5 created for two tracks on the CD-R, whereas it only took 1 minute to create a traditional md5 for the two tracks once they were drag/dropped onto the hard drive. Look at the results though...

CD md5:
c98b51abf0714fadd019954546310225 *1 Levitate (From All That You Can't Leave Behind Sessions).aiff
c4429df0bf11d21f778f201999ef0e7d *2 Love You Like Mad (From All That You Can't Leave Behind Sessions).aiff

HD md5:
c98b51abf0714fadd019954546310225 *1 Levitate (From All That You Can't Leave Behind Sessions).aiff
1cb36b0e049c2d77806ea19827becc41 *2 Love You Like Mad (From All That You Can't Leave Behind Sessions).aiff

It looks like the first track came over fine with no errors, but not the second track.

So, I re-drag/dropped the second track onto my drive and created another traditional md5 (again, it only took a minute):

New HD md5:
c98b51abf0714fadd019954546310225 *1 Levitate (From All That You Can't Leave Behind Sessions).aiff
c4429df0bf11d21f778f201999ef0e7d *2 Love You Like Mad (From All That You Can't Leave Behind Sessions).aiff

This time, the second track was fine.

ffooky
2005-05-24, 06:02 PM
Hmm..I'll have to try my other drive for the MD5 thing but all it proves is that what was dragged over (eventually) matched how the finder viewed the CD on at least one occasion. There is no way of verifying whether that view was correct or, indeed, if the hash in the MD5 is correct.

ffooky
2005-05-24, 06:25 PM
Can't edit my post for some reason.

I just made two MD5s for this uncorrectable track:

100% track 1 '20th Century Boy' recorded with minor problems (0.3% problem sectors)
100% 0 rderr, 0 skip, 4 atom, 1 edge, 34 drop, 3 dup, 0 drift
100% 221 overlap(0.5 .. 0.5663)

try 1 = da993c69f73c67a48da4ec14cdf50aa5 *1 20th Century Boy.aiff
try 2 = 6765566cfc654bb6d0c6c1e55b55f76d *1 20th Century Boy.aiff

So in order to make any attempt at a verifiable rip by drag/dropping in the Finder you'd have to make at least two MD5s, probably more, that completely tallied and then as many drag/drop extractions as necessary to produce AIFFs that verify against those MD5s.

Somehow, using xACT seems a bit easier IMO.

AAR.oner
2005-05-25, 02:16 AM
Somehow, using xACT seems a bit easier IMO.

:thumbsup

Evenreven
2005-05-25, 08:05 AM
This thread is very interesting!

As a mac user, I'm very glad someone is bringing this up. If I understand the technical argot here correctly, I would agree with AAR oner et al that the xAct ripper is the way to go, not only for the log, but also for the reliability.

I'm not sure what way of ripping the drag and drop-method uses. Since the files are actually converted into .aiff files and iTunes is integrated in the OS, could it be that it uses iTunes ripping (without error correction)?

I got really nasty glitches with iTunes once - error correction enabled - ripping an official cd release for personal use. This is not at all good enough, and in the absence of an EAC kind of app for macs, I'd go for outlawing iTunes ripping of silvers for new seeds at TTD. Is this too harsh? Or just necessary? Sooner or later a nasty glitch will appear.

AAR.oner
2005-05-25, 07:17 PM
I got really nasty glitches with iTunes once - error correction enabled - ripping an official cd release for personal use. This is not at all good enough, and in the absence of an EAC kind of app for macs, I'd go for outlawing iTunes ripping of silvers for new seeds at TTD. Is this too harsh? Or just necessary? Sooner or later a nasty glitch will appear.

I'd second that motion, ESPECIALLY in re: to seeding!

iTunes [even with error correction enabled] and the Drag-n-Drop method are not nearly as reliable as xACT...plus i'm one of "those people" who believes in having the "proof" of a log...

so, IMHO--xACT is the ONLY program we should be using for extraction...

by the way, thanks again fook for going thru all the time and trouble of performing this little "experiment" for us...i'll be PMing you in the near future for possible info to include in a "Mac guide for newbs" we're working on...cheers!

Evenreven
2005-05-26, 10:53 AM
I'd second that motion, ESPECIALLY in re: to seeding!

iTunes [even with error correction enabled] and the Drag-n-Drop method are not nearly as reliable as xACT...plus i'm one of "those people" who believes in having the "proof" of a log...

so, IMHO--xACT is the ONLY program we should be using for extraction...

by the way, thanks again fook for going thru all the time and trouble of performing this little "experiment" for us...i'll be PMing you in the near future for possible info to include in a "Mac guide for newbs" we're working on...cheers!

A mac guide for newbs (or n00bs :D ) would be very nice. I remember seeing a such kind of guide in the last days of the Groove. I'm sure it will be helpful for people like me too - those who aren't newbs anymore but don't use command line either. Go AAR and ffooky! :clap:

Maybe suggesting an immediate outlawing of iTunes was a bit strict - I was a wicked mood yesterday - or maybe it's just about right.

I don't know. What do you think, Lynne?

U2Lynne
2005-05-26, 11:07 AM
Maybe suggesting an immediate outlawing of iTunes was a bit strict - I was a wicked mood yesterday - or maybe it's just about right.

I don't know. What do you think, Lynne?
I actually replaced the part in the ABT Seeding Policy that said iTunes w/error correction on was an acceptable method of extraction the files. I replaced it with xACT. However, there are more places in the FAQ where it comes up and so I need to go through and find all those places.

Evenreven
2005-05-26, 11:27 AM
I actually replaced the part in the ABT Seeding Policy that said iTunes w/error correction on was an acceptable method of extraction the files. I replaced it with xACT. However, there are more places in the FAQ where it comes up and so I need to go through and find all those places.

Wow, that was fast! Good riddance. :clap:

Evenreven
2005-08-24, 03:17 PM
Looks like there's no way of seeding now without OSX 10.3 or 4. My version of xACT has a bug with the ripper, and I can't use a later version because of the OS. Well, I didn't have any seeding plans now, anyway.

U2Lynne
2005-08-24, 03:33 PM
You can always go back a couple of versions. Go to versiontracker and you should find them there.

Evenreven
2005-08-24, 03:50 PM
I tried that, but the ripper doesn't work until 1.4b25, a version that was mostly corrupted (now unavailable). b26-28 are 10.3/4 only. (I use 1.4b24 now, but alas can't rip with it)

ffooky
2005-08-24, 04:39 PM
Evenreven, do you have an external CD or DVD drive ?

ffooky
2005-08-24, 06:24 PM
I just realised that an external isn't necessary :)

D/l MissingMediaBurner (http://homepage.mac.com/rnc/.Public/MissingMediaBurner.zip) Insert the disc to be ripped and quit iTunes or any other program that may take possession of the CD.

Open a Terminal window and at the prompt type:

disktool -l

A list of discs will come up (***Disk Appeared ('disk0',Mountpoint = '', fsType = '', volName = '') etc, etc) and you should look for the audio disc in that list, e.g:

***Disk Appeared ('disk1',Mountpoint = '/Volumes/Dead Leaves And The Dirty Ground (Single)', fsType = 'cddafs', volName = 'Dead Leaves And The Dirty Ground (Single)')

The important bit is 'disk1'.

Now type:

disktool -u disk1 (or, of course, whatever the corresponding identity given in the stage above was)

The audio disc should now dismount after a couple more lines appear.

Now you can start up MissingMediaBurner. With any luck it should be able to find your drive. If it doesn't I'm afraid I can't help you there.

Click the Audio button and then select "Rip Audio Tracks to Wav Files" from the drop down menu at "Choose Function for Audio". Drag your destination folder in when prompted.

It's now very important that you put a check next to "Show Command" before clicking start.

The command that MMB is going to use to rip your disc will now be shown and you need to insert this sequence into the command:

-paranoia -paraopts retries=3

so that it is altered from e.g.

".........IODVDServices/1 ; mv *.wav........"

to:

".........IODVDServices/1 -paranoia -paraopts retries=3 ; mv *.wav........"

Click OK and your disc will be ripped as accurately as with xACT.

If you want something like the EAC log you can copy/paste the bottom part of the Terminal window that will be opened by MMB once it starts ripping:

samplefile size will be 137004044 bytes.
recording 776.6666 seconds stereo with 16 bits @<hidden> 44100.0 Hz ->'audio'...
using lib paranoia for reading.
percent_done:
100% track 1 successfully recorded
100% 0 rderr, 0 edge, 0 atom, 0 drop, 0 dup, 0 skip, 0 drift 0 overl
100% track 2 successfully recorded
100% 0 rderr, 0 edge, 0 atom, 0 drop, 0 dup, 0 skip, 0 drift 0 overl
100% track 3 successfully recorded
100% 0 rderr, 0 edge, 0 atom, 0 drop, 0 dup, 0 skip, 0 drift 0 overl

If you'd like the disc/track name to appear in this text it's possible to add a freedb look up to the command but the extracted tracks themselves will still be named track 01 etc.

HTH.

ffooky
2005-08-25, 02:01 PM
EDIT: "D/l MissingMediaBurner Insert the disc to be burned"

Should read:

"D/l MissingMediaBurner Insert the disc to be RIPPED"

and this bit should have read:

".........IODVDServices/1 ; mv *.wav........"

to:

".........IODVDServices/1 -paranoia -paraopts retries=3 ; mv *.wav........"

but maybe I wasted my time anyway.

U2Lynne
2005-08-25, 02:08 PM
I made the changes you mentioned to your above post, ffooky. And, I'm sure this will help someone, just maybe not the original person your wrote it out for.

ffooky
2005-08-25, 02:13 PM
Cheers Lynne, you're a star.

Evenreven
2005-08-26, 08:59 AM
Wow! Thanks, ffooky!
This looks so in-depth that even I can probably do it. I'm reasonably well-versed with computers in general, but command line still makes me freak out. Maybe I can now try to enter the wonderful world of the Terminal for the first time later today. :)

Have I ever said that I love this place? If not, I'll say it now! :clap:

ffooky
2005-08-26, 11:16 AM
No worries Evenreven, this should be a reasonably gentle intro into the exciting world of the Terminal as most of the hard work is done by MMB's GUI. MMB does have an "unmount disc" function that would avoid all the disktool stuff but unfortunately it rarely works with audio discs.

It's a shame MMB's coders didn't include the paranoia option out of the box but you shouldn't have too many probs inserting it at the right point in the command line.

If you have problems, copy any error messages and they'll help with troubleshooting.

Best of luck :)