| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
WalterDigsTunes 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 11 2007
Location: SanDiegoTijuana
Status: Offline
Points: 4373
|
 Topic: Burn speed??? Does it matter?
Posted: May 10 2010 at 20:43 |
 Mr ProgFreak wrote:
I haven't burned a CD or DVD in more than three years ... who needs this today, with USB sticks and memory cards? Even a friend of mine who is totally "non-geeky" recently got a new car that has a SD card interface for transfering audio.
So: find a way to get rid of the need for CD-R ... you'll also help protecting the environment by producing less plastic garbage.
|
Not everyone has a new car with USB/SD card interfaces. And heck, some people even use boomboxes to play CD-Rs.
|
 |
XunknownX
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 02 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 158
|
Posted: May 10 2010 at 20:36 |
|
Oh, yes, I certainly think it does. I burn at 16x, never faster.
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
|
Posted: November 27 2009 at 05:57 |
Dean wrote:
Jitter is indeed an issue that affects the SNR of the reconstituted analogue signal and therefore is something that is easily measured and identified empirically. Figures for clock jitter on the ADCs and DACs are well documented (and mathematically predictable - SNR = 20 × log [1/(π × input frequency × Tj)] where Tj=jitter time). Any figures you have for audiophile burners would be of interest to me, especially in comparison with box-standard transports. |
Uhm, it was my understanding there weren't going to be any math questions in this thread. 
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: November 27 2009 at 05:31 |
|
Jitter is indeed an issue that affects the SNR of the reconstituted analogue signal and therefore is something that is easily measured and identified empirically. Figures for clock jitter on the ADCs and DACs are well documented (and mathematically predictable - SNR = 20 × log [1/(π × input frequency × Tj)] where Tj=jitter time). Any figures you have for audiophile burners would be of interest to me, especially in comparison with box-standard transports.
Edited by Dean - November 27 2009 at 05:46
|
|
What?
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: November 27 2009 at 05:24 |
|
Digital is a very complex technology which doesn't sum up to a following of 0 and 1. There are jitter issues, among others, and an audiophile burner enables to reduce those issues.
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: November 26 2009 at 10:13 |
Dean wrote:
oliverstoned wrote:
The lower the better. So 1X is the best, and it's even better to do it on an audiophile home burner. |
Why?
Also, what difference can a "audiophile" home burner possibly make? |
The laser beam is gold plated. 
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: November 26 2009 at 10:10 |
nice one Mike 
|
|
What?
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: November 26 2009 at 09:49 |
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
^ it burns the pits more exactly, resulting in a smoother sound (less harsh).;-)
|
Exactly
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
|
Posted: November 26 2009 at 09:29 |
Tony R wrote:
At least audiophiles dont stone people or burn them at the stake...
|
Oh yeah? I was molested by an audiophile.  Of course everything on any media will degrade over time. All my bought CDs are still working fine as near as I can tell. I do have some CDs I made copying LPs. I still have those that have been subsequently replaced with bought CDs. It may be fun to check them out periodically as the best test of time is a test of time. Really fascinated by the ability we now have of totally digital storage of music. Is this the end of the degradation problem? I'm old enough to remember when a 1 gig hard drive was huge.
Edited by Slartibartfast - November 26 2009 at 09:45
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: November 26 2009 at 07:00 |
Dean wrote:
oliverstoned wrote:
The lower the better. So 1X is the best, and it's even better to do it on an audiophile home burner. |
Why?
Also, what difference can a "audiophile" home burner possibly make? |
Let's not go down that alley again! If Oliver believes it and it makes him happy and gives him comfort then what's the harm? At least audiophiles dont stone people or burn them at the stake...
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: November 26 2009 at 06:58 |
mystic fred wrote:
npjnpj wrote:
I've often asked myself this, good question.
@mystic fred: If you say CDs become unstable after eight to ten years, does this happen just after they've been in use for that time, or does it also happen if they're just stored? Probably after use, but you never know? |
i had stored them in proper storage folders, but some discs worked and some didn't, they would skip and jump, sometimes the cd player would not be able to "find" the disc at all, though the same player worked with some cd copies.
I had a revision of my cd copies collection, threw all the copies away, replaced some with remastered factory issues and some with used vinyl records. |
I've had the same problems. Now I follow advice that Mr Progfreak gave me (before he became a freak ) and copy all my cds in lossless format to external hard drives.
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: November 26 2009 at 06:51 |
|
^ it burns the pits more exactly, resulting in a smoother sound (less harsh).
;-)
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: November 26 2009 at 06:13 |
oliverstoned wrote:
The lower the better. So 1X is the best, and it's even better to do it on an audiophile home burner. |
Why?
Also, what difference can a "audiophile" home burner possibly make?
|
|
What?
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: November 26 2009 at 06:07 |
|
The lower the better. So 1X is the best, and it's even better to do it on an audiophile home burner.
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: November 23 2009 at 11:06 |
npjnpj wrote:
I've often asked myself this, good question.
@mystic fred: If you say CDs become unstable after eight to ten years, does this happen just after they've been in use for that time, or does it also happen if they're just stored? Probably after use, but you never know? |
They decay even when not used at all - but I guess that heavy usage accelerates the problem, since the discs can get quite hot (particularly in a computer drive).
|
|
mono
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 12 2005
Location: Paris, France
Status: Offline
Points: 652
|
Posted: November 23 2009 at 10:35 |
|
The slower you burn, the surer you are that your CD will be played correctly by the host.
(Very) old CD players often can't read CDs that are burnt too fast.
I had to burn in 4x for my Walkman Sony (the first one) to be able to (sometimes) read my CDs.
If it's regular data, go full speed.
If it's something that needs real time like audio and video, burn slow. 8x is generally well read everywhere.
|
|
https://soundcloud.com/why-music Prog trio, from ambiant to violence
https://soundcloud.com/m0n0-film Film music and production projects
https://soundcloud.com/fadisaliba (almost) everything else
|
|
mystic fred
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 13 2006
Location: Londinium
Status: Offline
Points: 4252
|
Posted: November 23 2009 at 09:03 |
npjnpj wrote:
I've often asked myself this, good question.
@mystic fred: If you say CDs become unstable after eight to ten years, does this happen just after they've been in use for that time, or does it also happen if they're just stored? Probably after use, but you never know? |
i had stored them in proper storage folders, but some discs worked and some didn't, they would skip and jump, sometimes the cd player would not be able to "find" the disc at all, though the same player worked with some cd copies.
I had a revision of my cd copies collection, threw all the copies away, replaced some with remastered factory issues and some with used vinyl records.
|
 Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
|
npjnpj
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 05 2007
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 2720
|
Posted: November 23 2009 at 07:54 |
I've often asked myself this, good question.
@mystic fred: If you say CDs become unstable after eight to ten years, does this happen just after they've been in use for that time, or does it also happen if they're just stored? Probably after use, but you never know?
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: November 21 2009 at 13:35 |
|
I haven't burned a CD or DVD in more than three years ... who needs this today, with USB sticks and memory cards? Even a friend of mine who is totally "non-geeky" recently got a new car that has a SD card interface for transfering audio.
So: find a way to get rid of the need for CD-R ... you'll also help protecting the environment by producing less plastic garbage.
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: November 21 2009 at 12:12 |
^ this is true Cedric, it is also possible that slower burn speeds can produce flawed data structures on the CD surface. Trial and error is the best way of identifying the optimum burn-speed for your set-up.
Drew wrote:
When Itunes asks you what speed you want to create an audio CD- does it matter what speed you choose? Will maximum speed vs. say, 8x speed create a slight difference in sound? Why does part of me feel that the slower you choose, the better the CD may sound? This probably sounds ludicrous.  |
Burn speed in itself cannot affect audio quality because the quality of the audio in the encoded files remains unchanged. What you get is difficulty in reading the digital data, causing the post-processing software/hardware to interpolate more of the missing data until such a point is reached that the data cannot be reconstructed and you get a drop-out. While this is annoying and can result in the disc skipping, glitching or sticking - the sound quality remains unchanged.
Faster burn speeds require the transport to spin the disc faster and the laser to switch on and off faster - this can cause the pits (digital "zeros") in the dye surface to become less well defined, resulting in difficulty in reading or misreading of the data. (for example a 1100011 code could be seen as either 1110011 or 1000011). However, manufactures of both the transport and the media would not specify either of them as being capable of achieving those speeds if they resulted in unreadable data.
mystic fred wrote:
It is true - slower burn speeds are better for audio files, but picture files are unaffected - i have heard this from a number of IT technicians, though burning audio files onto a CD can eventually become unstable however slowly you burn them, recently i took my collection of 500 burned CD's to the dump as they were becoming unstable after about 8 or 10 years .  |
Degradation of CDRs is a known problem and they should not be used for archiving - degradation of the aluminium coating due to chemical reaction with the bonding agents, UV degradation of the dyes used (the old "green" cyanine ones are particularly bad), attack of the polycarbonate layer due to stick-on labels and marker-pens, attack of the lacquer layer due to ingress of oxygen and air-borne polutants and micro-scratches on the surface diffusing the read-laser all result in giving CDRs a limited life-span. Glass pressed CDs and DVDs are less prone to this (but not immune) and are more reliable in the long term, but they also have limited life.
|
|
What?
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Burn speed??? Does it matter?
