Holy Cow Batman! Ripping Speed for ASPI vs Sonic

[jtbse]

I've been using WinAmp Pro for a couple of years now, and just made a personal discovery that really amazed me.

In all of the WinAmp versions I've been running (5.1 up to current 5.21), I've never been able to achieve super fast CD ripping speeds. The best I've ever been able to get was something like 7X.

Never really took the time to fiddle with it to try and speed up things...just chalked it up to limitations of my CD and DVD drives.

I had a few spare minutes today, and found references in the forums to using the Win NT ASPI layer for ripping instead of the imbedded Sonic engine that comes with WinAmp. I didn't really think this would make much difference since most of the threads were regarding dll conflicts or problems I wasn't encountering, and really didn't address ripping speed.

But I gave it a shot....went and got the winaspi32.dll referred to in DJEgg's post, and turned off the Sonic extraction engine in the CD input plugin. Put in a CD and started ripping....and all I can say is AMAZING! The ripping speed went to something like 16X!!!

So here's the question. What's the advantage of the Sonic engine on Win XP? If I start ripping CDs with ASPI, am I more likely to get errors on the rips or something of the sort?

[Omega X]

The ripping was probabaly done in Jitter Correction mode which isn't a secure rip. Secure rips for complete accuracy and reading past scratches takes longer.

[jtbse]

Originally posted by Omega X
The ripping was probabaly done in Jitter Correction mode which isn't a secure rip.

Thanks for the reply Omega X!

I am only slightly familiar with the notions of secure ripping, error correction, and their impact on speed; having used EAC for certain problematic CD's.

So are you saying that Sonic automatically does secure rips, and ASPI doesn't? Or is there anything configurable about this in Winamp besides "use Sonic or don't" ?

[Juanus]

<bump> I was hoping someone could give more information on this. Maybe Geekwad has some answers?

[gaekwad2]

I only know that Nero's wnaspi32 works faster for me as well.

[Squadman]

I tried Nero's wnaspi32 a while a back. But it was slightly slower at ripping.

I suppose it's different for everyone.

[ujay]

First off, there is no one fixed spec. for CD drives and different drives(and different firmware updates) may use slightly different command sets.

ASPI is a standard external communication layer and all manufacturers will make sure their drives work well with it, so there are rarely any problems.
One slight drawback is that not everything about the drive can be directly interrogated and the better CD applications often have to go through some lengthy set up proceedure when you first install to get the drive's full characteristics.

Sonic uses a different approach. It has a database that contains full details on a large number of drives and it then uses it's own internal communication layer to send the correct commands.

Very good in theory, but the problems seem to occur when
a) the database doesn't contain your drive or
b) the firmware has been updated and the database is no longer valid.
In which case it can end up using a command set that may, or may not, be the most appropriate for your particular drive.

This has given Roxio a bad reputation over the years as the Real Player of the CD world, it was well known for screwing up other software.

Use whichever one works best

UJ

[Omega X]

Originally posted by jtbse
Thanks for the reply Omega X!

I am only slightly familiar with the notions of secure ripping, error correction, and their impact on speed; having used EAC for certain problematic CD's.

So are you saying that Sonic automatically does secure rips, and ASPI doesn't? Or is there anything configurable about this in Winamp besides "use Sonic or don't" ?

No. What I am saying is it USED or uses Jitter Correction.

As far as I know, Sonic doesn't have a secure rip mode. ASPI was already explained.

If you do a rip in Sonic and go use a secure ripper like EAC, you will notice the difference in speed for rips.