Am I the only one, who is a bit of sceptical about the AccurateRip approach?
Maybe this has been voiced before, but how does the software actually separate good rips from bad rips?
But what if (when) huge numbers of people who have no inclination to learn anything new about ripping start using it?
What about when most of the people will be using the same generic LiteOn rebadged drives?
Won’t then the results that are most plentiful become the ‘accurate rip’ standard in the AccurateRip result database? All other rips will be compared to this ‘standard’.
In the time of fast spreading copy protections (the biggest future thread to accurate DAE rips, imho), this becomes problematic.
Let’s say 100 people with practically the same LiteOn drives (I’m using them as an example, not because they are bad, but because they are hugely popular) rip the same copy protected CD with the same clicks and pops (I’m now assuming that the copy protection cannot be bypassed on these LiteOn drives just by putting a disc in and pressing the ‘let her rip’ button).
This 100 times ripped ‘accurate’ rip becomes the standard (now assuming that the errors produced by the copy protection are deterministic over various rips on the same drive using the same software).
Then somebody who has know how, a wide selection of drives, plenty of software and time to use his/her ears, comes up with a pristine rip. No clicks and no pops, but it has a different CRC from those 100 rips that share the same CRC with each other.
Now, this pristine rip with no pops and clicks will differ from the that of the 100 people who used the same drive and got the same (bad) results. Will it not be deemed inaccurate in AccurateRip?
Or to put it another way, if you are the 101st person to use that same LiteOn drive and get the same rip with the clicks and pops and same CRC, then will that not lead you to false sense of security that your rip is ‘accurate’?
What’s the point of this kind of rip accuracy testing when most of the record companies have said that they will go 100% copy protected CD audio releases in a year or a little more?
I mean, is there even a perfect rip in the time of copy protections, where the copy protection actually overwrites the actual data and let’s the drive interpolate?
Shouldn’t the only criteria of a good rip at that point be actual sound of the ripped file, at which point we lose the common benchmark for a good rip. After all, how good it sounds is very subjective and some will end up liking the linearly interpolated audio data produced by their cd-rom drives while others will end up liking the higher order polynomial interpolated results that some ripping program produces…
This may be a stupid question and it may have been answered before, so do not take offence.
I’m just interested in why this AccurateRip approach would actually be worthwile in the time of copy protected audio cds…
I truly see the worthiness of it for non-protected audio cds, but for copy protectd CDs I wonder.