Re: Gap detection methods weirdness

Hi Derrick!

You wrote:

>  Anyone else experience this phenomenon?  Usually I use gap detection
> Method
> B for my CD-ROM drive (an LG CRD-8522B), set to ?Accurate?, because it
>
> detects gaps much quicker than Method C ?Accurate? (Method A doesn't
> work
> at all for my drive).  But every so often I come across a CD where
> Method B
> goes very slow, and even gets ?hung? on certain gaps.  In those cases,
>
> Method C has always been able to successfully determine the gaps
> without
> getting hung.
> So it seems that for my drive, there is no one ?best? gap
> detection.  Method B is usually best because it's fastest, but
> occasionally
> I have to use Method C, which I guess is more ?robust? or something.
> Do you think it's possible that this means that Method C is also more
> ?accurate? and maybe I should use it all the time, even if it is
> slower
> than Method B?

Basically it shoudln't be more robust...
Method A is a little bit more robust than the other two, but otherwise
they are
all quite the same...  (A - Extract subchannels, B - Seeking, C - Play
CD)

cu, Andre


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]