Cd Burning speeds

[cheekypaul]

I beleive that the faster you burn the less errors, as long as the blank media is up to it, so how can 1x burn with errors sound better than 4x with none?

[Kurtstudio]

The debate is over sound quality. Some engineer claim that the 1 x speed is more repesentative of their mixs that the ones burnds at 8 x speed. We're not as concerned with errors, of course we want less errors so burning at your fastest speed seems the right way to go. For example when saving photes to a cdr you burn them at 1x becasue of quality. Didi or endineers or mastering folks please settle the audio debate.

[Bob Olhsson]

My understanding is generally, if all things were equal:

The higher the burn speed, the fewer errors you get.

but...

The slower the burn speed, the better the disk's reflectance and with that, the signal to noise ratio of the digital signal inside the player. This improves compatibility and can reduce jitter caused by interference in the clock circuit.

Unfortunately specific burner/media combinations are not equal so you need to test specific combinations to say anything definitive.

[Kurtstudio]

It seems that I've started a big debate. A friend from Audio Media magazine is looking into this it. He seems to support the idea that the best results are 1:1 test is done on Gold/Blue Cds, which are costly but we're talking quality and that demos, photes, books to cd etc. are fine for faster speeds. I'll keep my ear to the e-mail and forward any findings but it seems that 1x is the way to go for Quality. I'll forward my findings but the debate still continues.

[guitates]

Maybe this could be a "media" = type and style of the blank CD used??

I use Kodak silver/gold CD's, and to my ears (with MLCD) the 1X sound quality and richness of tone is MUCH better than the faster speeds.

I use the yamaha 4416 burner...

Please take time to inform us what YOU use, and help us all "get" this issue

Much Thanks in advance>>>>

[guitates]

give me my "great signal to noise ratio" baby

How many BLERs are allowed for Glass Masters??

No such thing as BLER free CD's!! Eh?? [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[Danny Caccavo]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kurtstudio:
It seems that I've started a big debate. A friend from Audio Media magazine is looking into this it. He seems to support the idea that the best results are 1:1 test is done on Gold/Blue Cds, which are costly but we're talking quality and that demos, photes, books to cd etc. are fine for faster speeds. I'll keep my ear to the e-mail and forward any findings but it seems that 1x is the way to go for Quality. I'll forward my findings but the debate still continues.

---

Well, it's a pretty old debate, actually.

"pit geometry" is theoretically the only thing that can get screwy at higher speeds. Yet when we tested 1x vs 4x re: pit geometry with a Clover analyzer, it was pretty much identical - totally within spec. What Clover says is that pit geometry is what can affect compatibility between players.

The whole thing allegedly comes down to Jitter, and we know how these discussions go.

I don't know of any blind tests that conclusively proved that 1x sounded any better than 4x - if someone knows of any, I'd like to be pointed towards them.

And if everything gets reclocked when the glass master gets made, I doubt if it makes any difference.

DC

[Danny Caccavo]

quote:

---

Originally posted by guitates:
Come on Digi!! U guys have an opinion on this??

Everything I have read says that you run the risk of buffer underruns the faster you burn.........YES---NO????

---

If you get a buffer underrun, you've got a coaster - unless it's one of the newer burners. So that's kind of a non-issue.

The issue is either jitter, or something that cannot yet be measured.

DC

[Danny Caccavo]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj julio:
This seems pretty strange to me about using the fastest burning speed possible that your software will allow. Everything I have ever read or heard in any pro audio recording forum has always said to record no higher than 2X speed to prevent errors or dropping of BITS. This seems to be the standard logic for digital technology. Unfortunately we still live in the pre-adolescent days of digital technology. It's growing up quickly and we are closer to acheiving all the glory of those analog days with the ease and speed digital offers

---

"Dropping of Bits" doesn't seem to make sense if a CD analyzer actually shows an improved error rate at higher burn speeds.

Don't know how it could "drop bits" anyway...

DC

[Danny Caccavo]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson:
My understanding is generally, if all things were equal:

The higher the burn speed, the fewer errors you get.

but...

The slower the burn speed, the better the disk's reflectance and with that, the signal to noise ratio of the digital signal inside the player. This improves compatibility and can reduce jitter caused by interference in the clock circuit.

Unfortunately specific burner/media combinations are not equal so you need to test specific combinations to say anything definitive.

---

That was the last theory I heard as well - but that wouldn't it be a moot point if a glass master were cut from the cdr - wouldn't everything get reclocked anyway?