|
CD help! (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Nemesis44 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zombie0729
well... i'm not really sure anyone has answered my questoin yet lol... but superb information |
Whoops he he.
Do you mean just a CD that has been copied or an MP3?
If it's been copied it depends on the method used. If you copy the whole CD image with an image ripper the theory is that you would get no change in sound. if you just put it in the cd burner and hit copy then yes you may get some deteriation in sound.
Cheers
Nem |
|
|
| Zombie0729 |
| no, i'm actually talking about the CD medium. There are different types of blank cd's, music enhanced, etc, etc... is there really a big diference |
|
|
| Inertia |
ahh, different types of CDs is it? well, the highest quality you could get on CD depends on what the original source was.
for example, if you have a vinyl, and rip it to your PC to burn it, the quality will depend on what you did to rip it.
now, if you have an original CD, and copy it to a blank cd, as long as you did an exact copy, it should be the same.
those CD-Rs for music, i don't really understand. i've never bought one, but if i ever learned anything about CDs, is that blank ones don't have any formatting on them, when you burn them as data, they use a CDFS (Compact Disc File System) so it can be read by multiple operating systems, whereas for music, the formatting is completely different.
so i'm guessing "Music Enhanced CD-R"s are just preformatted for audio? |
|
|
| Zombie0729 |
| guys... does anyone know all the differences between all the different types of CD-Rs out there? there is a lot and i need to know the truth |
|
|
| zoomzoom |
I am not terribly knowledgable about this, but I do know that many CD-R companies actually use the same CDs, but with a different label on them. This means that while there may be 10 or 15 different major brands of CD-Rs, most of them are the exact same as others.
In general, you get what you pay for. If you're buying a cheap stack of 50 CD-Rs for ten bucks (twenty cents per disc), they probably aren't going to be the same quality as the ones that cost about fifty cents per disc. This is more of a guideline then anything though, since sales and supply/demand enter into the picture and sometimes you can find a sweet deal on good brands.
As for me, I tend to stick to TDK. I've never burned a coaster and very rarely have problems reading a clean, unscratched disc. Experiment with different brands and see which ones you find to be the best. |
|
|
| sebjr |
i still have yet to find a definitive answer on the whole debate...everyone seems to have different opininos on playing cds out. i know danny howells uses cds ALOT but he is probably getting send cd promos which are ripped at extremely high quality, or are uncompressed (eg not mp3). whereas I use 192 kbps mp3s :P i havent played on a massively awesome sound system yet with these mp3s so have no idea if it will sound crap or not. we have a very expensive sound system in a club in auckland, and one of my friends has djed there before...im going to ask him next time i see him what his opinion is...the stigma cd's once had is slowly disappearing IMO.
one thing that is itneresting is there are more sites like trax2burn.com opening up. these are label sponsored sites which release mp3s for download for a small charge. teh quality is guaranteed by the likes of darren emerson to be good enough to play out on a club system. i have downloaded a few of these files and they sound pretty good, just as good as my vinyl. they are also only 192kbps mp3s...if the trend continues and producers continue to release new tunes thru websites...then i guess the question 'are mp3's good enough to play out?' has been answered... |
|
|
| Inertia |
| i think the question he's asking is what's the difference between a normally CD-R and those fancy "Music Enhanced/Music Only" blanks you can also buy... i myself have wondered this a few times too... |
|
|
| Nemesis44 |
I could be wrong, but as far as I can tell the blank CD industry is a bit of a rip off.
All that's happening is that 1 and 0 are being read and as far as I can tell the information would be the same coming from a budget CD or a 'music' specific CD-R. The CD player still has to read the information and from what I figure the quality of the medium shouldn't matter. If budget CD-Rs can hold data for games etc. I imagine that the requirements for music would be less in terms of precission.
Just doesn't make sense if you keep in mind how digital works.
Cheers
Nem |
|
|
| Inertia |
| thought so as well. the only thing that would make some slight sense is that maybe those "Music Enhanced" CD-Rs are i'm guessing garaunteed, or at least more effective with those old CD players that won't take burned CDs. i know my mom's car is a case of this. it's a btch for it take any CD i burn, and it won't even take a Defected in the House Promo CD mixed by Liquid People that was given to me as a gift. come to think of it, it won't even take my ORIGINAL copy of Josh Wink's Profound Sounds v2. what a drag... |
|
|
| zoomzoom |
Much of the quality of a CD-R has to do with its reflectivity. CD-Rs only reflect a fraction of what a normal CD reflects, and a CD-RW is even less (for an example, just look at the data side of these CDs side-by-side). Good quality CD-Rs have a higher reflectivity than cheaper ones.
Nemesis: I realize that yes, the actual 'data' 1s and 0s isn't any different between brands, but higher quality CD-Rs ensure that the data is accurate and is able to be read properly. One misread or just plain wrong bit can cause a huge error in playback. |
|
|
| Dervish |
Whats read off a CD is just a stream of data. The refelectivity if bad would mean the whole CD wouldn't work (thats why some CD players can't use CDR's). Remeber that a you burn into it to make holes (unreflective holes).
So to the origonal poster I'd say more expensive CDs might be more reliable in that I've had cheap ones which had the refeltive bit flake off.
But so long as the CD isn't THAT cheap it'll be fine, also some CDR's can degrade over time.
However with regards to music quality so long as the actual surface integratiy is maintained (i.e. not flaking off or scratched) one CD is the same as the other.
As for the CD vs. Records debate. I'd say there ain't a huge difference. To sample a waveform (i.e. audio) you need to sample it at twice the maximum freqency component. So a 44kHz sample rate allows a max freqency of 22kHz, the audiable range being 20Hz - 20kHz. There is a possiblity of whats known as aliasing but in audio I wouldn't really worry about it. |
|
|
| zoomzoom |
While normal CDs use microscopic pits as the ones in the data stream, CD-Rs are different. CD burners do not actually "burn" a hole in the CD. Rather, CD-Rs use a special dye, that upon interaction with the CD recorder's laser, changes its reflectivity. This creates an effect which mimics the physical pits on normal CDs, tricking the CD player into thinking the dyed parts are actually pits.
For some good reading on CD-R technology, check out:
http://www.kopyrite.com/tech_cdr.htm
For an article on CD-R quality and reviews of brands, check out:
http://www.cdmediaworld.com/hardwar...d_quality.shtml
-Notice on this what I mentioned in an earlier post, namely that there are only a few different types of CD (Taiyo Yuden, TDK, Kodak, Ricoh, Mitsubishi and Fornet)
For a more technical discussion of my preferred brand (TDK), go to:
http://www.cd-info.com/CDIC/Technol.../Media/TDK.html
Hopefully this clears up some misconceptions about CD-Rs. It's pretty interesting stuff once you read a bit about it. I used to not know about these details, but when I kept getting coasters I decided to read up. |
|
|
|
|
