Redump Forum — [Resolved] gap problem

Re: [Resolved] gap problem

null@example.com (F1ReB4LL) — Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:02:45 +0000

fuzzball wrote:

@F1ReB4LL
Thank you for your explanation.
In this case, DIC's cue was correct.

I've seen many cases when DIC simply replaced the sub sector, so I don't trust its subs.

sarami wrote:

This case is sometimes seen in PC-engine disc. e.g. http://redump.org/disc/2416/
If LBA[091343] is the 1st sector of the track 05, INDEX 01 is 00:03:12, while if it is the last sector of the track 04, INDEX 01 is 00:03:11.
The pregap of PC-engine is basically consistent, so it can realize that EAN sector is the 1st sector of the track. But this disc isn't consistent, so I don't know which is true.

According to the P channel the EAN sector belongs to the previous track. The first sector of pregap should have zeroes in the P-channel, the next sector should have FFs. The first non-pregap sector after the gap should also have P-channel padded with FFs. This is described in rainbow books.

Re: [Resolved] gap problem

null@example.com (fuzzball) — Sun, 12 Jun 2016 15:48:00 +0000

@F1ReB4LL
Thank you for your explanation.
In this case, DIC's cue was correct.

@sarami
It's FM TOWNS disc.

Re: [Resolved] gap problem

null@example.com (sarami) — Sun, 12 Jun 2016 15:19:52 +0000

LBA[091342, 0x164ce], Audio, 2ch, Copy NG, Pre-emphasis No, Track[04], Idx[01], RMSF[06:46:72], AMSF[20:19:67], RtoW[0, 0, 0, 0]
LBA[091343, 0x164cf], Audio, 2ch, Copy NG, Pre-emphasis No, MediaCatalogNumber [0000000000000], AMSF[     :68], RtoW[0, 0, 0, 0]
LBA[091344, 0x164d0], Audio, 2ch, Copy NG, Pre-emphasis No, Track[05], Idx[00], RMSF[00:03:10], AMSF[20:19:69], RtoW[0, 0, 0, 0]

This case is sometimes seen in PC-engine disc. e.g. http://redump.org/disc/2416/
If LBA[091343] is the 1st sector of the track 05, INDEX 01 is 00:03:12, while if it is the last sector of the track 04, INDEX 01 is 00:03:11.
The pregap of PC-engine is basically consistent, so it can realize that EAN sector is the 1st sector of the track. But this disc isn't consistent, so I don't know which is true.

By the way, the latest dic can't detect that this sector is the 1st sector of the track 05, because dic only detect this when the pregap is 00:03:00, 00:02:00, 00:01:74.

Re: [Resolved] gap problem

null@example.com (F1ReB4LL) — Sun, 12 Jun 2016 14:24:40 +0000

Both are fine, "-flushmode FUA" command works a bit differently between them, the rest is exactly the same.

Re: [Resolved] gap problem

null@example.com (fuzzball) — Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:41:49 +0000

Which exe should I use? 0xa8?

Re: [Resolved] gap problem

null@example.com (F1ReB4LL) — Sun, 12 Jun 2016 11:03:27 +0000

DIC doesn't make good subs, too many fixes/replacements.

http://forum.redump.org/topic/14725/subdump/

subdump -i D: -f test.sub -mode 6 -rereadnum 25 -fix 2 -- precise dump, slow (for subchannel archival purposes)
subdump -i D: -f test.sub -mode 6 -rereadnum 25 -fix 2 -quick -- fast dump (not suitable for archival, but good enough for gap detection).

D: should be PX-760 used for DIC.

[Resolved] gap problem

null@example.com (fuzzball) — Sun, 12 Jun 2016 05:38:00 +0000

There is a difference between the DIC and EAC.

DIC + PX-760A

FILE "dic (Track 5).bin" BINARY
  TRACK 05 AUDIO
    INDEX 00 00:00:00
    INDEX 01 00:03:11

EAC + DVR-111, iHAS324 (method A)

FILE "Track 05.wav" WAVE
  TRACK 05 AUDIO
    INDEX 00 00:00:00
    INDEX 01 00:03:12

EAC + iHAS324 (method B)

FILE "Track 05.wav" WAVE
  TRACK 05 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00

I attached a DIC log.
Is there anything else you need?