| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Burning (reliable) audio CDs?
I'm sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know how to burn
*reliable* audio CDs. I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? Thanks for any tips... Richard |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message
I'm sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know how to burn *reliable* audio CDs. You might want to play them on players that were designed to play CD-Rs. I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. More likely consumer units that are old or in a bad state of repair. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hey Richard,
I've burned hundreds of CDs and had only one failure, likely something I did, that was at least a year ago. I buy the cheapest I can find, brands mean dick. Try recording at a slower speed. Still have problems, must be yer burner or process...likely not the discs IMHO. Cheers, -rj--- www.thelittlecanadaheadphoneband.ca www.lchb.ca wrote in message ... I'm sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know how to burn *reliable* audio CDs. I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? Thanks for any tips... Richard |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
**bg** wrote:
I buy the cheapest I can find, brands mean dick. OK, right. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message ... I'm sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know how to burn *reliable* audio CDs. I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. It's the inexpensive consumer units that are 'unreliable' then. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? No, use a high quality OS ! (joking). I would be a little suspicious of doing anything 'realtime' in Linux, but that's not based on experience. I guess if the CD-R ain't a coaster, then the drive has done it's thing OK. Seriously though, CD-Rs are at best a compromise. Their reflectivity is a fraction of that of replicated CDs, not to mention any other factors. &4 minute CDs should have a pre-groove that is wider than 80s, and easier to track. But these days I suspect 74 minute media is really 80 minute media with an ATIP programmed to say 74. So one does the best one can, which is to find a media that gives consistant results on the widest range of players. Traditionally this has been Mitsui or Taiyo Yuden. I find SKC to be consistant and highly 'compatible', and is a real manufacturer. geoff |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
wrote in message I'm sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know how to burn *reliable* audio CDs. You might want to play them on players that were designed to play CD-Rs. I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. More likely consumer units that are old or in a bad state of repair. I'd be suspicious of the original poster's CD burner and/or burning software. I've churned out hundreds of CD-Rs on the cheapest possible Chinese media using an oldish Creative burner, Nero software and a willing teenager, and they all play on (afaik) all consumer equipment. We've sold lots of them at gigs, with my phone number on them, and I've never had a complaint. The old burner's max speed is 8X, so maybe that accounts for it. But I doubt it. These CDs have been relatively short (about 25 mins) but I've also burnt compilations of my own that have gone to 80 minutes. They play fine on my hi-fi, my crap car system and my boom box. I had lots of trouble with skipping a few years ago when I was using an even older burner and first-generation Adaptec software, if I remember correctly. I would be inclined to wonder about the original poster's Linux burning software, which may well be flaky. Raglan |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Try using 74 min CDs.They are more compatible with CD players.Try to find 74
min Mitsui CDs. wrote in message ... I'm sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know how to burn *reliable* audio CDs. I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? Thanks for any tips... Richard |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article writes: It used to be that 1x was burning speed for the lowest errors and widest compatibility, but the new burners sold nowadays for $40-$50 have a minimum speed of 4x. Try different speeds and see if/how much difference it makes. I use 10X on my 24x and 48x drives and it seems to work fine with garden variety blanks. One problem I've been having (which seems to be settled for the moment with Taiyo Yuden Silver blanks) is finding modern CDRs that work in a 1X (real time) recorder. Those Verbatum disks that look like 45 RPM records are 16X last time I checked, and they might be fine, but I never got around to trying them before finding a blank that worked. but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. This is a function of the player. If the disk will play on any one player, it's technically OK, but there are no parameters you can measure or even specifications you can verify that will assure playability under the worst of conditions. If your business is delivering working CDRs, you just have to experiment to find blanks that work well in your drives. If you're making CDRs for convenience, be prepared to make a replacement now and then. And if you find someone with a player that can't play any of your disks, tell them to get a new player or get theirs fixed. Life is tough and a little unpredictable in the consumer electronics world. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? Try all these, but read (at least some of) http://www.cdrfaq.org first, it may answer lots of your questions. Test each brand/speed/other variables combination on every CD player you have, or at least on the older models. If you don't have an older model, go to a thrift store and buy one. I have a 1980's vintage Multitech player that CREAKS when the tray slides open and closed, but it plays the CDR's I make. This is the crudest, most time-consuming but most effective way to make CDR's that will reliably play in the widest range of players. Thanks for any tips... Richard ----- http://mindspring.com/~benbradley -- I'm really Mike Rivers - ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Taiyo Yudens will work at 1X also HHB makes a line of high end CDs designed
to work under 4X,they are perfect for mastering. Mike Rivers wrote in message news:znr1098972334k@trad... In article writes: It used to be that 1x was burning speed for the lowest errors and widest compatibility, but the new burners sold nowadays for $40-$50 have a minimum speed of 4x. Try different speeds and see if/how much difference it makes. I use 10X on my 24x and 48x drives and it seems to work fine with garden variety blanks. One problem I've been having (which seems to be settled for the moment with Taiyo Yuden Silver blanks) is finding modern CDRs that work in a 1X (real time) recorder. Those Verbatum disks that look like 45 RPM records are 16X last time I checked, and they might be fine, but I never got around to trying them before finding a blank that worked. but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. This is a function of the player. If the disk will play on any one player, it's technically OK, but there are no parameters you can measure or even specifications you can verify that will assure playability under the worst of conditions. If your business is delivering working CDRs, you just have to experiment to find blanks that work well in your drives. If you're making CDRs for convenience, be prepared to make a replacement now and then. And if you find someone with a player that can't play any of your disks, tell them to get a new player or get theirs fixed. Life is tough and a little unpredictable in the consumer electronics world. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? Try all these, but read (at least some of) http://www.cdrfaq.org first, it may answer lots of your questions. Test each brand/speed/other variables combination on every CD player you have, or at least on the older models. If you don't have an older model, go to a thrift store and buy one. I have a 1980's vintage Multitech player that CREAKS when the tray slides open and closed, but it plays the CDR's I make. This is the crudest, most time-consuming but most effective way to make CDR's that will reliably play in the widest range of players. Thanks for any tips... Richard ----- http://mindspring.com/~benbradley -- I'm really Mike Rivers - ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Troy" wrote in message news:kkbgd.46038$%k.1142@pd7tw2no... Taiyo Yudens will work at 1X also HHB makes a line of high end CDs designed to work under 4X,they are perfect for mastering. .... and of course "Audio" CD-R media must work at 1x . geoff |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
OK....whatever that means??????
Geoff Wood -nospam wrote in message ... "Troy" wrote in message news:kkbgd.46038$%k.1142@pd7tw2no... Taiyo Yudens will work at 1X also HHB makes a line of high end CDs designed to work under 4X,they are perfect for mastering. ... and of course "Audio" CD-R media must work at 1x . geoff |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:22:59 GMT, "Troy"
wrote: OK....whatever that means?????? He surely means CDR's sold as "Music CD-R"s that have the bit set that tells a standalone recorder that it's okay, these have the "Tape Tax" paid on them, and this tax allegedly makes its way to the recording artists who get pirated on these consumer recorders. You can use these "Music CDR's" as data CDR's in a computer CD/RW drive, but data CDR's won't record in a consumer standalone recorder. Geoff Wood -nospam wrote in message ... "Troy" wrote in message news:kkbgd.46038$%k.1142@pd7tw2no... Taiyo Yudens will work at 1X also HHB makes a line of high end CDs designed to work under 4X,they are perfect for mastering. ... and of course "Audio" CD-R media must work at 1x . geoff ----- http://mindspring.com/~benbradley |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ben Bradley" wrote in message ... On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:22:59 GMT, "Troy" wrote: OK....whatever that means?????? He surely means CDR's sold as "Music CD-R"s that have the bit set that tells a standalone recorder that it's okay, these have the "Tape Tax" paid on them, and this tax allegedly makes its way to the recording artists who get pirated on these consumer recorders. You can use these "Music CDR's" as data CDR's in a computer CD/RW drive, but data CDR's won't record in a consumer standalone recorder. .... and and (presumably) they work at 1x , unless the recorder buffers the signal and writes in bursts. Or else one would have to sing multiples of octaves higher than normal ! geoff |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? Thanks for any tips... Richard Don't use standard 80 minute CDR's , use 74 Minute CDR's. Mitsui (MAM) may be the only manufactuter of these now, they are the only thing I use for Masters and if a client has a problem with one of the duplicates that I make on 80 minute CDR's I replace it with one of the Mitsui 74's. I've been burning CDR's since the Sony was the only machine available for burning ($30,000 for the machine/software and $35.00/disc.). I never had trouble until the CDR 80's came out. Richard H. Kuschel "I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Richard Kuschel" wrote in message Don't use standard 80 minute CDR's , use 74 Minute CDR's. Mitsui (MAM) may be the only manufactuter of these now, they are the only thing I use for Masters and if a client has a problem with one of the duplicates that I make on 80 minute CDR's I replace it with one of the Mitsui 74's. I've been burning CDR's since the Sony was the only machine available for burning ($30,000 for the machine/software and $35.00/disc.). I never had trouble until the CDR 80's came out. I had about a 60% failure rate when media was that price. But I had an HP4020i .... geoff |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Chel van Gennip" wrote in message ... On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 22:10:26 +0200, Geoff Wood wrote: "Richard Kuschel" wrote in message I've been burning CDR's since the Sony was the only machine available for burning ($30,000 for the machine/software and $35.00/disc.). I never had trouble until the CDR 80's came out. I had about a 60% failure rate when media was that price. But I had an HP4020i .... The HP4020i was later: in 1995 writer about $1300, media pices about $8, but I recognize the failure rate. But if you remember that prices, DVD writers at $75 CD media at $0.20 and DVD media at $0.60 seems quite a bargain. Yeah, I was actually paying around @ NZ$25 which was US$15 at the time, I think... geoff |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 22:44:07 -0500, greggery peccary wrote
(in article ): "Richard Kuschel" wrote in message ... I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? Thanks for any tips... Richard Don't use standard 80 minute CDR's , use 74 Minute CDR's. Mitsui (MAM) may be the only manufactuter of these now, they are the only thing I use for Masters and if a client has a problem with one of the duplicates that I make on 80 minute CDR's I replace it with one of the Mitsui 74's. I've been burning CDR's since the Sony was the only machine available for burning ($30,000 for the machine/software and $35.00/disc.). I never had trouble until the CDR 80's came out. Richard H. Kuschel "I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty could be your burn speed. since newer software &/or burners usuall only burns 8x minimum. some better burners allow slower more accurate burning of audio files. I've heard conflicting reports about burn speed. In the early days slower seemed better when problems happened. A few years ago, someone put forth the idea that, in some cases, faster was better. Don't know what to make of it, but I've been using TaiyoYuden Golds and some Mitsui silvers. The Golds have been very solid. Just starting to use the MAM-A Mitsuis. Regards, Ty Ford -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric stuff are at www.tyford.com |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
Richard Kuschel wrote:
Don't use standard 80 minute CDR's , use 74 Minute CDR's. Mitsui (MAM) may be the only manufactuter of these now, they are the only thing I use for Masters and if a client has a problem with one of the duplicates that I make on 80 minute CDR's I replace it with one of the Mitsui 74's. I've been burning CDR's since the Sony was the only machine available for burning ($30,000 for the machine/software and $35.00/disc.). I never had trouble until the CDR 80's came out. I have a question: Do all Mitsui CDRs actually say "Mitsui" in the middle? One of the local stores sells ones as Mitsui that don't have that written in the middle. My choices are limited in that I am using the ink-jet printables and there are only a few choices if you don't want the white ones. Rob R. |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have a question: Do all Mitsui CDRs actually say "Mitsui" in the middle? One of the local stores sells ones as Mitsui that don't have that written in the middle. My choices are limited in that I am using the ink-jet printables and there are only a few choices if you don't want the white ones. Rob R. No, Now they say MAM-A , they changed the name, but they are the same discs. they are also available in silver inkjet printable as well as white. Richard H. Kuschel "I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Rob Reedijk wrote: Richard Kuschel wrote: Don't use standard 80 minute CDR's , use 74 Minute CDR's. Mitsui (MAM) may be the only manufactuter of these now, they are the only thing I use for Masters and if a client has a problem with one of the duplicates that I make on 80 minute CDR's I replace it with one of the Mitsui 74's. I've been burning CDR's since the Sony was the only machine available for burning ($30,000 for the machine/software and $35.00/disc.). I never had trouble until the CDR 80's came out. I have a question: Do all Mitsui CDRs actually say "Mitsui" in the middle? One of the local stores sells ones as Mitsui that don't have that written in the middle. My choices are limited in that I am using the ink-jet printables and there are only a few choices if you don't want the white ones. Not all of them do, BUT lots of stuff is also rebadged inaccurately too. If your drive can interrogate to see what the identification code on the blank is, this will tell you a lot. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Start out with a Plextor Premium from Newegg (~$75) with true EFM,
etc. A bargain. Familiarize your self with Plextools Pro. Download the free Eac (Exact Audio Copy) Invest in a reliable burning software that suits your needs--I use CDRWin but there are several out there. Nero is useful but not that reliable. Calibrate the CD offset for both reading and writing. Offset values are listed on the internet if you do not wish to bother with the test CDs. This will ensure that you can produce exact copies for archival work as well as mastering. Take a selection of known wave files, burn them to CD @ 4x Rip the wave files to the HD and use the file compare of EAC to see if they are them same. Repeat this process a few times. They should be EXACTLY the same EVERY time. This is a bit of an oversimplification, and does not touch on subjects like AWS, but that is more or less the best strategy I have seen so far. And to be practical, I don't get the clicks that you referred to anymore. Repeat this process with a variety of CD burners and media and you will notice that they are often NOT exactly the same. Usually the errors are in the range of a few hundred samples but at high speeds you will see way more errors. If I do a calibration run for all my gear, I usually get a few over 2000 samples., and these usually come from the DVD burners, which generally neither burn nor real digital audio very well. For critical burning, use only Taiyo Yuden, especially blue dye. The plextor will also allow you to turn up the laser power slightly for fussy players such as car players. I keep a couple of very marginal CD players here to test for compatibility, and burning a CD @ 4x onto TY has always played in any player The advanced tools for the plextor will show you the optimum speed for your CDs by showing you the number of errors. For CDs that I sell, I always burn at 4x. For less formal wear and tear, I use 12x. On inexpensive media I often see dropouts at low speed--I just burned an HP cd tonight that was full of missing samples. Burning sample accurate CDs used to be very complicated, now it is inexpensive and the hard work has been done. Everyone has different ways of doing this; for mastering I like to know that the CD that leaves here is an exact copy of the final bounce. In addition, there are now many masters that were burned onto CDs which are starting to slowly go bad, and these techniques will allow you to burn longer lasting masters as well as recover all of the audio from the old ones--even material in the leadin/leadout areas for drives that were not offset corrected. Plextor error correction is I believe natively supported in Samplitude and Sequoia; I haven't tested it, but in any case the ripping algorithms are better in EAC and Plextools. The EAC program is useful for many types of audio recovery from poor quality disks. A 24x plextor is generally considered to have the best lens for his kind of work, and the can often be found on Ebay, ymmv. For most work, the Plextor Premium is fine. If jitter is a problem you may consider the yamaha burners. They are hard to find. The Yamaha is not as reliable a reader as the Plextor, but can burn larger pits in the CD. Several of the Lite-on burners are good if you wish to save a few dollars, but they do not have the advanced features of the Plextor. and the price of the plextor has come way down now. If you work with horrifically scratched CDs you might consider a Cyberdyne as well, due to the perfect C2 recovery, but the 24x plextor might be even better. jj On 27 Oct 2004 17:20:48 -0400, wrote: I'm sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know how to burn *reliable* audio CDs. I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? Thanks for any tips... Richard |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
J. Joyce writes:
Start out with a Plextor Premium from Newegg (~$75) with true EFM, etc. A bargain. Familiarize your self with Plextools Pro. Download the free Eac (Exact Audio Copy) Invest in a reliable burning software that suits your needs--I use CDRWin but there are several out there. Nero is useful but not that reliable. Calibrate the CD offset for both reading and writing. Offset values are listed on the internet if you do not wish to bother with the test CDs. This will ensure that you can produce exact copies for archival work as well as mastering. Take a selection of known wave files, burn them to CD @ 4x Rip the wave files to the HD and use the file compare of EAC to see if they are them same. Repeat this process a few times. They should be EXACTLY the same EVERY time. This is a bit of an oversimplification, and does not touch on subjects like AWS, but that is more or less the best strategy I have seen so far. And to be practical, I don't get the clicks that you referred to anymore. Repeat this process with a variety of CD burners and media and you will notice that they are often NOT exactly the same. Usually the errors are in the range of a few hundred samples but at high speeds you will see way more errors. If I do a calibration run for all my gear, I usually get a few over 2000 samples., and these usually come from the DVD burners, which generally neither burn nor real digital audio very well. For critical burning, use only Taiyo Yuden, especially blue dye. The plextor will also allow you to turn up the laser power slightly for fussy players such as car players. I keep a couple of very marginal CD players here to test for compatibility, and burning a CD @ 4x onto TY has always played in any player The advanced tools for the plextor will show you the optimum speed for your CDs by showing you the number of errors. For CDs that I sell, I always burn at 4x. For less formal wear and tear, I use 12x. On inexpensive media I often see dropouts at low speed--I just burned an HP cd tonight that was full of missing samples. Burning sample accurate CDs used to be very complicated, now it is inexpensive and the hard work has been done. Everyone has different ways of doing this; for mastering I like to know that the CD that leaves here is an exact copy of the final bounce. In addition, there are now many masters that were burned onto CDs which are starting to slowly go bad, and these techniques will allow you to burn longer lasting masters as well as recover all of the audio from the old ones--even material in the leadin/leadout areas for drives that were not offset corrected. Plextor error correction is I believe natively supported in Samplitude and Sequoia; I haven't tested it, but in any case the ripping algorithms are better in EAC and Plextools. The EAC program is useful for many types of audio recovery from poor quality disks. A 24x plextor is generally considered to have the best lens for his kind of work, and the can often be found on Ebay, ymmv. For most work, the Plextor Premium is fine. If jitter is a problem you may consider the yamaha burners. They are hard to find. The Yamaha is not as reliable a reader as the Plextor, but can burn larger pits in the CD. Several of the Lite-on burners are good if you wish to save a few dollars, but they do not have the advanced features of the Plextor. and the price of the plextor has come way down now. If you work with horrifically scratched CDs you might consider a Cyberdyne as well, due to the perfect C2 recovery, but the 24x plextor might be even better. jj On 27 Oct 2004 17:20:48 -0400, wrote: I'm sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know how to burn *reliable* audio CDs. I'm using standard 80 minute CDR blanks, but I have a lot of problems with skips when I play them on inexpensive consumer units. In particular, I have long tracks (60 minutes or more), but there will often be skips in them. I'm using the Linux program "cdrecord" to burn. Should I be using high quality media? Or perhaps burning slower? Or??? Thanks for any tips... Richard Dear J: Thanks for all the suggestions. Finally, someone admits that this is a real problem, and I'm not imagining it. It just amazes me that this has not been solved yet. I guess like everything in the PC world, you should assume it does not work unless it can be proven otherwise! Richard |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mannr wrote:
Finally, someone admits that this is a real problem, and I'm not imagining it. It just amazes me that this has not been solved yet. I guess like everything in the PC world, you should assume it does not work unless it can be proven otherwise! A Mac's a "PC", too, and using both the built-in burner of a 2002 TiBook, an outboard Gplyph/Plextor Wildfire burner, and a standalone HHB burner I have never burned a coaster that wasn't my own damn fault. I generally use Costco TDK's for bulk stuff, and Fuji for a supposedly better CDR and Mitsui 8x for supposedly even better. But whateve I've used, no coasters, no skips, and so forth. So it isn't a problem for everybody or for all systems. -- ha |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mike Rivers wrote:
In article writes: I've heard conflicting reports about burn speed. In the early days slower seemed better when problems happened. A few years ago, someone put forth the idea that, in some cases, faster was better. With most of today's blanks, faster is better, but only a little faster. 4X to whatever speed you find to be unreliable. Top speed is usually reliable for data, but errors which are completely correctable in computer data when writing at top speed are often too dense for correction during real time audio playback. In my informal tests with a Plextor Premium drive and T-Y discs I've found that 16X gives me slightly lower error rates than 4 or 8X. I feel that there is little point going faster than 16X as most drives start to use variable speeds above that - the inner part of the disc may be burned at 16X while the outer part of the disc will be burned at a higher speed. Only the very outer part of the disc will be burned at the speed you select if you try to burn at 32X or faster. There's no real substitute for experimentation - try burning a variety of discs at a variety of speeds and then test them with a drive that can check error rates like the Plextor Premium or certain LiteOn drives. Cheers. James. |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mike Rivers wrote:
In article writes: I've heard conflicting reports about burn speed. In the early days slower seemed better when problems happened. A few years ago, someone put forth the idea that, in some cases, faster was better. With most of today's blanks, faster is better, but only a little faster. 4X to whatever speed you find to be unreliable. Top speed is usually reliable for data, but errors which are completely correctable in computer data when writing at top speed are often too dense for correction during real time audio playback. In my informal tests with a Plextor Premium drive and T-Y discs I've found that 16X gives me slightly lower error rates than 4 or 8X. I feel that there is little point going faster than 16X as most drives start to use variable speeds above that - the inner part of the disc may be burned at 16X while the outer part of the disc will be burned at a higher speed. Only the very outer part of the disc will be burned at the speed you select if you try to burn at 32X or faster. There's no real substitute for experimentation - try burning a variety of discs at a variety of speeds and then test them with a drive that can check error rates like the Plextor Premium or certain LiteOn drives. Cheers. James. |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Richard Kuschel wrote:
Don't use standard 80 minute CDR's , use 74 Minute CDR's. Mitsui (MAM) may be the only manufactuter of these now, they are the only thing I use for Masters and if a client has a problem with one of the duplicates that I make on 80 minute CDR's I replace it with one of the Mitsui 74's. I've been burning CDR's since the Sony was the only machine available for burning ($30,000 for the machine/software and $35.00/disc.). I never had trouble until the CDR 80's came out. I'm still a little worried about Mitsui discs since the company re-structured a couple of years ago. There's a guy on the mastering web board who has done a fairly comprehensive test of different media recently and the Mitsui error rates were far higher than any other quality brand. This ties in with anecdotal reports of poorer quality that I've heard. Older Mitsuis gave me the lowest C1 error rates that I have ever seen but I've not dared to buy newer Mitsuis until someone could confirm that the quality is still there - so far the only evidence that I have seen suggests that T-Y or Verbatim are the ones to go for. Cheers. James. |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Richard Kuschel wrote:
Don't use standard 80 minute CDR's , use 74 Minute CDR's. Mitsui (MAM) may be the only manufactuter of these now, they are the only thing I use for Masters and if a client has a problem with one of the duplicates that I make on 80 minute CDR's I replace it with one of the Mitsui 74's. I've been burning CDR's since the Sony was the only machine available for burning ($30,000 for the machine/software and $35.00/disc.). I never had trouble until the CDR 80's came out. I'm still a little worried about Mitsui discs since the company re-structured a couple of years ago. There's a guy on the mastering web board who has done a fairly comprehensive test of different media recently and the Mitsui error rates were far higher than any other quality brand. This ties in with anecdotal reports of poorer quality that I've heard. Older Mitsuis gave me the lowest C1 error rates that I have ever seen but I've not dared to buy newer Mitsuis until someone could confirm that the quality is still there - so far the only evidence that I have seen suggests that T-Y or Verbatim are the ones to go for. Cheers. James. |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
"James Perrett" wrote in message I'm still a little worried about Mitsui discs since the company re-structured a couple of years ago. There's a guy on the mastering web board who has done a fairly comprehensive test of different media recently and the Mitsui error rates were far higher than any other quality brand. This ties in with anecdotal reports of poorer quality that I've heard. Older Mitsuis gave me the lowest C1 error rates that I have ever seen but I've not dared to buy newer Mitsuis until someone could confirm that the quality is still there - so far the only evidence that I have seen suggests that T-Y or Verbatim are the ones to go for. I recall something on CDR-Info or wherever from the year dot that gave Mitsui a high error count on some particular burner at some particular speed ( I think that was in the days when 8 was 'tops'). In which case I wouldn't be too worried.... geoff |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
"James Perrett" wrote in message I'm still a little worried about Mitsui discs since the company re-structured a couple of years ago. There's a guy on the mastering web board who has done a fairly comprehensive test of different media recently and the Mitsui error rates were far higher than any other quality brand. This ties in with anecdotal reports of poorer quality that I've heard. Older Mitsuis gave me the lowest C1 error rates that I have ever seen but I've not dared to buy newer Mitsuis until someone could confirm that the quality is still there - so far the only evidence that I have seen suggests that T-Y or Verbatim are the ones to go for. I recall something on CDR-Info or wherever from the year dot that gave Mitsui a high error count on some particular burner at some particular speed ( I think that was in the days when 8 was 'tops'). In which case I wouldn't be too worried.... geoff |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| OT Political | Pro Audio | |||
| Artists cut out the record biz | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
