Search options (Page 29 of 30)

yes, update guides or make a wiki and let us do it!

not sure how to do this, some sort of addition to the guides would be nice

i hope this rate continues. it will be nice when verified sets take over teh internetz

a lot of games have the same version with different serials so i can understand that choice. as long as there is a unified naming convention i am happy

maybe this thread doesnt and i'm just failing to understand something, however this is the issue as i see it.

1. different gap sizes can occur for the same cd/cd-rom
2. ripping tracks individually will result in size deviation between multiple rips if gaps deviate (according to Jackals post above), however according to greynol, if gaps deviate, this has NO effect on the end result/checksum (see: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/ind … opic=72969 )
3. ripping the cd-rom as a single image will not influence size (even if gap sizes deviate), thus are more likely to be correct dumps

maybe i'm just overthinking this or inserting a problem where it is not necessary. i didnt start this thread as a criticism by any means and maybe this issue is only relevant with scratched CDs, however after reading fireball and themabus's 2/3 page argument on subchannel accuracy, i became curious on the effect of mismatching gap size on the accuracy of dumps.

dude, cd-roms are an asspain!

oic, i'm ripping a cd for the first time in EAC in a week or so. i just put it in three times and got different values for gaps each time lol

a single file is obviously much more manageable and you dont need to deal with the issue of gap accuracy which may result in mismatching file checksums for the same disc

when i rip cds with EAC i use 'append gaps to previous track', however i believe gaps are part of the track so it may effect game playback if you rip games that way. the data depends on the audiotracks being a certain way, unlike CDs which you can append gaps to the end of to prevent silence in the beginning of a track

the great thing about an open database like this is that ANYONE can challenge the results by simply buying the game and comparing.

it reminds me of scientific evidence, no matter how much evidence you accumulate (in this case the amount of dumpers with matching checksums), you can never have 100% PROOF unless you do it yourself. thats why a database is not about absolutes, but credence. redump.org provides credence that an image has been dumped properly, thats all that it can do. but considering we're all going to be dead one day, the amount of effort put into ensuring a correct dump has been done as happens on redump, makes us look like professional archivists. on UG, there used to be complaints about images that were incorrectly dumped, this hasnt been the case with the redumps sets and i think that says something, especially when you look at how popular they have become on that tracker (the thread is almost 40 pages long!).

if you ever expect redump to be as popular as no-intro, then the only way to accomplish this is keep on keepin on, dump images and spread sets.

i see what you mean and it is a good point. since people collect based on serial number however i think this is a good start. also it would take a lot of research to track down how many editions each title has then take just as much time to add that info. we are talking about what? 5000+ titles? lol