PDA

View Full Version : Faulty CDs



Keith
2007-06-02, 09:43
Album - The Heat
Artist - Dan Reed Network

My original copy provided a whole host of errors when I attempted to rip it to FLAC from about track 11 onwards. I assumed that this was due to the disc deteriorating over the years.

I purchased another copy off the web and got the same results so it looks as if it was a bad pressing. Both discs are clean and undamaged.

Has anybody else come across similar issues?

tot
2007-06-02, 13:39
I would try another cd drive/computer first, it usually helps.

It happened to me today since I am slowly re-ripping my collection to flac. My usual ripping computer could not read one cd, but the another computer read it without problems.

Keith
2007-06-03, 02:20
I did try that but alas no joy. I've only had two failures and one of those was due to a small scratch thta a slight buffing with Brasso fixed, so that leaves just this disc annoying but a 0.1% failure rate. From a track point of view it is only 4 tracks out of 12,000 about 0.03%

This is the output for the last track rather aptly called 'Long Way To Go':

Secure Rip Log created at 10:15:22 Sunday, June 03, 2007

The quality percentage is the ratio of the minimum number of re-reads
to the actual number of re-reads of the CD data sectors.

D: The Heat - Dan Reed Network
Track 15: Completed with unreliable data - Quality 6.38% [Long Way To Go]
00:00:00 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:03 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:07 7 re-reads required to get good data
00:00:10 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:14 9 re-reads required to get good data
00:00:18 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:21 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:25 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:28 11 re-reads required to get good data
00:00:32 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:36 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:39 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:43 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:46 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:50 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:54 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:00:57 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:01 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:04 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:08 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:12 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:15 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:19 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:22 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:26 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:30 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:33 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:37 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:40 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:44 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:48 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:51 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:55 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:01:58 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:02 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:06 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:09 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:13 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:16 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:20 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:24 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:27 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:31 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:34 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:38 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:42 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:45 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:49 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:52 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:02:56 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:03:00 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:03:03 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:03:07 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:03:10 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:03:14 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:03:18 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:03:21 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts
00:03:25 Unreliable data after 16 re-read attempts

ncpl
2007-06-05, 11:56
my guess is that it's a protected disc. A quick 'look' via isobuster will tell you if there's another file in there that's blocking the rip. I had the same on a few of mine and it solved the problem nicely.

Mark Lanctot
2007-06-05, 12:09
There's a program called A-Ray Scanner that can detect if a copy-protection mechanism is used.

http://www.softpedia.com/get/CD-DVD-Tools/CD-DVD-Rip-Other-Tools/ARay-Scanner.shtml

[LEGAL NOTE: it won't let you do anything about it, it'll just let you know it's there.]

Usually they promote it by use of the following logo:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Copy_control_logo.png

jonheal
2007-06-06, 03:53
You can usually spot a protected disc visually. There will be two distinct bands on the metallic (playing side) of the disc. The inner band will contain the music data, and the outer band, the protection data.

AndyC_772
2007-06-06, 05:02
I can't really see any protection system allowing the first 14 tracks to be read OK but failing just on the 15th - unless the publisher knows perfectly well that most of the album is complete rubbish that's not even worth copying!

There's also a clue in that some parts of the disc DO give valid data after a few retries. If the data were intentionally corrupted on the disc, that wouldn't happen.

My guess is that the track in question is near the outer edge of the disc, where disc wobble is at its worst and the original pressing may be at its least accurate. Can you slow down the CD-ROM drive's ripping speed? Failing that you may have to patch up any odd clicks with a sample editor like Cool Edit (Adobe Audition) or Audacity.

Skunk
2007-06-06, 05:14
The first defense (or is it offense?) against copy protection is to disable auto-run on the ripping drive. The easiest way to do it is instruct EAC to take care of it, and have EAC running before inserting the disc in the drive. You may also be able to hold shift while inserting on windows, but never tried.

You could try ripping track 15 in burst mode with test and copy, as well as Andy's suggestion of slower speeds.

Browny
2007-06-06, 06:18
I too have a copy of this CD. It dates from the early 90's so there is no chance of it being a DRM issue.

However my copy too was a pain to rip due to the CD Rot that has occurred on the disc. My disc was produced by Philips - one of their pressing plants used in the early 90s had a Quality Control issue.

Sounds like this album was part of that bad batch.

I thought this was out of print??? - Did you buy your replacement second-hand?

jonheal
2007-06-06, 06:55
It's probably just a bad CD. I bought a CD recently -- a new release. When ripped, one track jerked and skipped. It played okay on a CD player. There was no visible copy protection on the disc, so I took a chance and exchanged it where I bought it for another. The replacement worked fine. It was simply a case of a bad disc -- although there was no visible damage on the surface of the disc.

Browny
2007-06-06, 12:07
This album was one of many made by PDO (Philips Du Pont Optical) in the late eighties / early nineties.

There is an article about it in the following link:

http://www.classical.net/music/guide/society/krs/excerpt3.html

It relates to classical CDs, but its the same plant as used for the Dan Reed Network disc (in my case at least). Interestingly it mentions about PDO providing replacements...I may have to give this a try (especially as I have others from the same era displaying the same symptoms).

Mark Lanctot
2007-06-06, 12:14
In the photo of CD rot here:

http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?DiscRepair

near the end, note the second CD reads, if you can read backwards, "MADE IN THE U.K. BY PDO". Note the wavy, grainy bronzing.

Browny
2007-06-06, 14:15
See the attached for what my Dan Reed Network disc looks like now...

There's only a small piece left that is still silver!

Keith
2007-06-07, 09:40
Yep the replacement was secondhand.

Both discs were UK according to the data in the middle.


I've managed to get hold of the last four tracks in Flac format from a friend who's disc isn't faulty. I think it's a different pressing. I'm going to take my copies up next time I go and visit them and see if I can spot the difference. That way I'll know what to look out for...

Re comments on the state of the disc below from Browny - I assumed that the disc was supposed to look like it was 'Heated' thus the discolouration as part of the package, maybe you're right, I'll have a look at the good disc my friend has.

Phil Leigh
2007-06-07, 10:48
See the attached for what my Dan Reed Network disc looks like now...

There's only a small piece left that is still silver!

That disc is definitely "bronzed" from CD-rot.
I've had a total of 8 out of 2,000+ that suffered the same fate. All of mine were PDO discs. Annoyingly 2 of them were rare low volume pressings that are irreplaceable because there is no alternate pressing and all the ones out there are bronzed... grrrr.

Mark Lanctot
2007-06-07, 10:54
Re comments on the state of the disc below from Browny - I assumed that the disc was supposed to look like it was 'Heated' thus the discolouration as part of the package, maybe you're right, I'll have a look at the good disc my friend has.

Discs definitely aren't that bronzed on purpose.

You may want to try a drive that can read rewriteable media, they can read lower reflectance. Unfortunately just about all drives made in the last 5 years can read rewriteable media.

cliveb
2007-06-07, 11:07
There is an article about it in the following link:

http://www.classical.net/music/guide/society/krs/excerpt3.html

....Interestingly it mentions about PDO providing replacements...I may have to give this a try (especially as I have others from the same era displaying the same symptoms).
I can confirm that PDO will replace bronzed discs - I had them replace about half a dozen back in late 2004. The address supplied for PDO in the classical.net article mentioned by Browny is the one I had to send my faulty discs to. It took quite a while for them to source replacements for them all, but they eventually came up trumps after a few weeks.

One point of interest: one of the faulty discs I sent in was "17-11-70" by Elton John. This original CD version had long been superceded by a remaster with extra tracks by the time PDO replaced it, and yet they somehow managed to find the original non-remastered version. I was a little disappointed not to get the extra tracks!

Phil Leigh
2007-06-07, 11:12
I can confirm that PDO will replace bronzed discs - I had them replace about half a dozen back in late 2004. The address supplied for PDO in the classical.net article mentioned by Browny is the one I had to send my faulty discs to. It took quite a while for them to source replacements for them all, but they eventually came up trumps after a few weeks.

One point of interest: one of the faulty discs I sent in was "17-11-70" by Elton John. This original CD version had long been superceded by a remaster with extra tracks by the time PDO replaced it, and yet they somehow managed to find the original non-remastered version. I was a little disappointed not to get the extra tracks!

Given the mechanism by which the bronzing occurs, I wonder how they manage to have a stock of NOS non-bronzed discs - presumably these are actually recent repressings or contemporary pressings from another plant?

cliveb
2007-06-07, 11:21
Given the mechanism by which the bronzing occurs, I wonder how they manage to have a stock of NOS non-bronzed discs - presumably these are actually recent repressings or contemporary pressings from another plant?
None of the replacements say "Made by PDO" on them, so my guess is that they try to track down contemporary pressings from other plants (which must be quite difficult in some cases). I can't imagine they'd go to the trouble of repressing the older versions, (unless the number they have to replace is very large).

funkstar
2007-06-08, 03:46
One point of interest: one of the faulty discs I sent in was "17-11-70" by Elton John. This original CD version had long been superceded by a remaster with extra tracks by the time PDO replaced it, and yet they somehow managed to find the original non-remastered version. I was a little disappointed not to get the extra tracks!
If it is rare enough, then you probably got a more valuable disk :)

<rhetorical questions>
I know printers and disk plants always over run on lines they produce. I wonder what they do with the excess? Do they archive it in case it might be needed later? Does it go to the customer as a little extra product for the same cost? When i worked in a design house we always got the over-run in the delivery, but i wouldn't be surprised if the pressing plants keep the excess and the glass master in their stores.
</rhetorical questions>