Thanks Kees.
FWIW, I'm pretty sure that I was able to reorganize the audio data in order against an alternate pressing which did not have the issue and verify it against the AR database. In other words, the data that ended up in the HTOA exists in at least one other pressing where it was not in the HTOA. I know this because the AR database does not include hashes from HOTA.
In any event, careful QC should have caught the issue. Maybe it did and it was decided to go ahead and sell it anyway.
Regarding bits are bits skeptics, I fall into that category as I own a disc from a pressing that contains errors that are not present in other pressings from the same digital master (master as in the digital data prior to it being pressed). I know it isn't just my disc because of AR data combined with the ability to extract the same data from multiple drives and programs with multiple settings without even the hint of difficulty. This is assuming the immaculate physical appearance of the disc isn't adequate enough evidence.
FWIW, I'm pretty sure that I was able to reorganize the audio data in order against an alternate pressing which did not have the issue and verify it against the AR database. In other words, the data that ended up in the HTOA exists in at least one other pressing where it was not in the HTOA. I know this because the AR database does not include hashes from HOTA.
In any event, careful QC should have caught the issue. Maybe it did and it was decided to go ahead and sell it anyway.
Regarding bits are bits skeptics, I fall into that category as I own a disc from a pressing that contains errors that are not present in other pressings from the same digital master (master as in the digital data prior to it being pressed). I know it isn't just my disc because of AR data combined with the ability to extract the same data from multiple drives and programs with multiple settings without even the hint of difficulty. This is assuming the immaculate physical appearance of the disc isn't adequate enough evidence.