CDRs

SSM

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 20, 2005
17,311
65
0
Tipoca City
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
If you do make your own music CDR compilations using a computer, what speed do you usually choose when recordings the discs?

When I had my huge recording spree back in 2001-2, I chose 4x max as it seemed I could hear differences between 4x and 8x, as the latter seemed compressed (even if the music files were compressed).

Despite what non-audiophile CDRers were saying in their FAQs at that time, I could also discern differences between brands of CDRs. Verbatims seemed marginally brighter at the top end.
71_71.gif.90e48c720ca56a2d2fa0532dd3380cc7.gif


Also, from a technical point of view, a "Music" CDR does not offer increased aural benefits from a non "Music"-designated CDR. The former is just formatted for use in separates CDR decks, right?

And finally, it is not possible for a music CDR made from a PC recording to be aurally inferior to a dedicated CDR deck, right? I don't think I will ever own the latter... though I'm curious to know - from audiophool users of CDR decks - as to the truth of the matter.

SS...about to embark on a new session of CDR compiling:nerd:

 

SSM

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 20, 2005
17,311
65
0
Tipoca City
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
addendum: I'm pleased to say all of my music CDRs made in 2002 have survived intact these four years.
smile.png


(TDK Music, Verbatim Music, Mitsubishi, Memorex Black take a bow)
thumbs_up.gif.3c8ee62eda0e86146178ab30b9facd86.gif


 

meninblack

Wammer Plus
Wammer Plus
Jul 20, 2005
24,223
1,358
208
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
I'm not sure about "sounding" different, but if I want to be certain that a CDR will play OK in my CDP without skipping, I need to use a good-quality blank (Sony and JVC are favourite) recorded at 4x.

The "music" ones have a flag set that domestic CDR's read. Often these machines won't record onto the non-music type. Makes no difference to playback in a redbook player.

 

SSM

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 20, 2005
17,311
65
0
Tipoca City
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
ok. 4x is best!

I'll try not to let my finickiness make me hear differences between cdr brands:?

 

ErikFH

Wammer
Wammer
Aug 2, 2005
3,100
5
0
Netherlands
AKA
Erik
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
solidstateman wrote:

Also, from a technical point of view, a "Music" CDR does not offer increased aural benefits from a non "Music"-designated CDR. The former is just formatted for use in separates CDR decks, right?
Not exactly answering your query but for audio cd-recorders, a TDK rep explained (in an article a few years back) that there won´t be much difference between audio and lower speed cdrup to 12x max.Above this (24x,48x) it was recommend to use audio cdrs. Note that (at least older) audio recorders copy with normal speed only.

Ime onlythe quality of thediscis relevant. Cdrs thatcan be looked throughwhen held against day lightwill lead to craprecordings.My Marantz recorder can make copies onto all kind of discs but I prefer to use audio discs (TDK) as they lead to best results.

 

SSM

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 20, 2005
17,311
65
0
Tipoca City
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
ah, more corroboration:)I also find see-through CDRs less attractive in use than darker ones like Memorex Black. Translucent Kodak Golds sounded a tad thin.
glum.gif.19305e5ca189352e84c85f8ec971e437.gif


SS

 

rockmeister

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 24, 2005
18,072
730
173
Scotland
AKA
John
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
as someone recording from a Mac and from my shiny Yamaha Hard drive CDR I'm sorry to tell you that the differences in quality are VAST. On the slowest burn setting, the Mac comes fairly close to the Yam, but at higher speeds (8X +) the yam storms away. The Yam has a HQ recording setting which apparently records slightly longer pits and does indeed make things sound even better. If you are recording for replay on a decent CD player, the Yam has to be the way to go. I use the computer to make complitations for the car, where it doesnt matter much. On the blanks front, the advice above is correct..I've heard very small differences (I think) between media, but have settled on JVC audio discs as a good affordable compromise.

 

technobear

Ursine Wammer
Wammer Plus
Sep 11, 2005
2,687
111
143
Glastonbury, UK
AKA
Chris
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
I would use 1x if I could but the slowest my PC offers is 4x.

The player in the car won't play high-speed CD-Rs. It's fine with 4x.

 

technobear

Ursine Wammer
Wammer Plus
Sep 11, 2005
2,687
111
143
Glastonbury, UK
AKA
Chris
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
I would use 1x if I could but the slowest my PC offers is 4x.

The player in the car won't play high-speed CD-Rs. It's fine with 4x.

 

Shakey

Wammer
Wammer
Aug 3, 2006
781
1
48
Wallingford, Oxon.
AKA
Gavin
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I use 8x for making compilations for me mates...TBH (I'm going to sound a right snobby bastard for saying this, but I don't mean it like that) I think that's fine for their systems.
icon_redface.gif.eb51a1f92a0314cdfc14dd3cb4473da1.gif


As for replay on a fancy system, I'd happily go along with Rocky's comments about a hard drive CDR....not heard one though!
smile.png


 
E

eisenach

Guest
Well, I've got a TASCAM stand-alone recorder, so 1x there, then.

Now, what about the blanks? The German mag "Stereo" insists that black blanks are best. Anyone tried them?

 

Jim

Wammer
Wammer
Apr 9, 2006
569
2
0
Nottingham
AKA
James
Well i cant hear any difference from brands of cdrs and whether at 4x or 16x, my writer wont go any faster.

But i can hear a difference in cheap interconnects and more expensive ones as other people cant. Funny that. Jim.

 

T.white

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 31, 2005
570
0
0
South Wales, , Unite
rockmeister wrote:

as someone recording from a Mac and from my shiny Yamaha Hard drive CDR I'm sorry to tell you that the differences in quality are VAST. On the slowest burn setting, the Mac comes fairly close to the Yam, but at higher speeds (8X +) the yam storms away. The Yam has a HQ recording setting which apparently records slightly longer pits and does indeed make things sound even better. If you are recording for replay on a decent CD player, the Yam has to be the way to go. I use the computer to make complitations for the car, where it doesnt matter much. On the blanks front, the advice above is correct..I've heard very small differences (I think) between media, but have settled on JVC audio discs as a good affordable compromise.
Agree withthat, :^I used to own a Yammy Hdd recorder likeRocky's, very nice machine and no slouch on playback either.

The slow burn it does is 'the nuts', they do sound a little better andare much muchmore durablethan standard (quick) burn jobbies i found.Also, the jvc discs are a decent choice, good value too.

 

piccadilly

Wammer
New Wammer
Aug 30, 2006
12
1
0
London, , United Kin
I was told by the guy in PC World (yeah I know not an audiphile destination) that cd's copied at the highest speed, e.g. 48 times, are best as there will be more data on the disc.

The Nero Express program that I use confirms this: 48 times+ 7,200 KB, 8 times=1,200 KB. So surely more kilo bytes is better.

I copy at 48 times and can't discern any difference beween copies and the original cd when played on my Marantz Cd63 Ki mk2. I've been using Verbatim 52 times cd-'rs.

I've just ordered a 50 pack of the 48 time version of these online for about 14 quid including postage.

 

Biscuit

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 19, 2005
6,491
8
0
Cambs, , United King
erm, I'm no expert, but it sounds like the guy at PC World was speaking bollocks to me. There is a fixed amount of data that can go onto a cd (in audio terms 74min and 80min depending on the cd I think), the 42x vs 8x just refers to the number of bytes copied per second onto the disc, not the total bytes that will be transfered. Generally opinion goes that the slower the writing process, the less errors are likely to occur.

 

Forum statistics

Threads
109,266
Messages
2,316,207
Members
69,443
Latest member
Opensea0