Hi, guys.

I'm having trouble getting an accurate dump of the following:

World Soccer Winning Eleven 2002 [SLPM-87056]
http://redump.org/disc/12751/

Having followed your dumping guide to the letter, I cannot get the checksums of the audio tracks to correspond to those submitted on your site nor does the sector value of the data track.

Software:
EAC 0.99 prebeta 5
Iso Buster 2.8.5

Optical Drive: Pioneer BDR-206D FW 1.06 (Correction Offset = +667)

As per your setup instructions, I determined the pregaps using EAC (2 Seconds across the board per track).

Using IsoBuster, I then calculated the combined offset from sector 130458:
20 rows (320 bytes)
+80 samples
Write Offset: -587

(see attachment)

Redump has the sector listed at 130457 for the data track (not 130458). If I extract the data track between sectors 0-130457 using Iso Buster, the checksums match fine with those submitted on your site. However, the sector view indicates the length to be 130458 (as per attachment).

Why the discrepancy?

Finally, when I enter the combined offset value into EAC under Drive Options (+80) and dump the audio tracks, the checksums don't correspond to those submitted on your site either.

Why again?


I'm genuinely intrigued to know what's going on.
neutral

Post's attachments

sectorView.gif 32.7 kb, 15 downloads since 2012-01-13 

You don't have the permssions to download the attachments of this post.

Your drive's offset is shifting the data forward by an entire sector. To calculate the combined offset, you have to start counting from sector 130457, and continue into sector 130458. So there's actually 2352+320 bytes = +668 samples, and the write offset is +1.

Thanks for taking the time to explain, mock. The checksums now match those submitted by other users.

I only have 3 playstation games; I'll endeavour to submit those I have over the coming days now that I have a better understanding of what's going on.
(:

Would someone mind updating the wiki guide to perhaps make a clear(er) note of this? I'd never of figured out the correct combined offset had you not have explained what was going on.

I've also just realised that I've posted in the wrong section of the forum (sorry).