-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Is there a difference between a regular CD-R and one labeled Audio?
- Thread starter Tipycol
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2002
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
No cd can sound better then another cd. They are all pure digital, not analog. An audio cd is the same as a data cd, there is no difference...
80minute cd = 700mb of data
74minute cd = 650mb of data
80minute cd = 700mb of data
74minute cd = 650mb of data
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2001
- Location
- Clinton, AR
My 2cents here
From what I know an audio CD generally requires a better quality CD than just pure data.
Let's use a generic 100cd spindle as an example.
If you used all of them for data, you may only burn 10 coasters (bad CD's)
If you use them all for audio, you will probably get considerably more (possibly half)
There was an article on the main page quite a while back, you may want to check the archives.
So basically the "audio" CD-R's are their pick of the litter.
From what I know an audio CD generally requires a better quality CD than just pure data.
Let's use a generic 100cd spindle as an example.
If you used all of them for data, you may only burn 10 coasters (bad CD's)
If you use them all for audio, you will probably get considerably more (possibly half)
There was an article on the main page quite a while back, you may want to check the archives.
So basically the "audio" CD-R's are their pick of the litter.
price is the only difference
http://www.techtv.com/callforhelp/stepone/story/0,24330,3399378,00.html
http://www.techtv.com/callforhelp/stepone/story/0,24330,3399378,00.html
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2001
KerryrreK said:
You can use audio CD-R's to burn data
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2001
"Consumer" stand-alone audio CD recorders require special blanks. There is no difference in quality or composition between "data" blanks and "music" blanks, except for a flag that indicates which one it is. It's likely that "music" blanks are optimized for recording at 1x, since anything you record "live" is by definition recorded at 1x (though some dual-drive systems allow track copying at higher speeds).
You don't have to use "music" blanks to record music on a computer or on a "professional" stand-alone audio CD recorder. Nothing will prevent you from doing so, but there's no advantage to it.
The "music" blanks are more expensive than the "data" blanks because a portion of the price goes to the music industry. The specifics vary from country to country. In the USA, the money goes to the RIAA, which distributes it to artists who have navigated through a complicated application process.
Some manufacturers have on occasion marked low-quality data discs as being "for music", on the assumption that small errors will go unnoticed. Make sure that, if you need the special blanks, you're getting the right thing.
http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq07.html#S7-17
You don't have to use "music" blanks to record music on a computer or on a "professional" stand-alone audio CD recorder. Nothing will prevent you from doing so, but there's no advantage to it.
The "music" blanks are more expensive than the "data" blanks because a portion of the price goes to the music industry. The specifics vary from country to country. In the USA, the money goes to the RIAA, which distributes it to artists who have navigated through a complicated application process.
Some manufacturers have on occasion marked low-quality data discs as being "for music", on the assumption that small errors will go unnoticed. Make sure that, if you need the special blanks, you're getting the right thing.
http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq07.html#S7-17
10 out of a hundred errors? Wow. I got a stack of 20$ for a hundred 12X 800 minute silver frisbees from compusa about a year ago. Probably burnt through 40 of them with my Digital Research Ide burner at 32X (For some reason Nero lets me burn these at 32X but not 40X. It lets me burn my more expensive 12X cds at 24X but no higher. Go figure. Oh, I've not burnt a single bad one. And I do all kinds of sick ****... Downloading or viruscanning while im burning. Real stupid ****. Maybe I just got a REALLY lucky burner and pack of CD's or maybe my lord and master Satan has blessed me with super Cdburning powers. Fear my Burneyness!
Edit... oh and all my copys are on the fly, and I never turn data verify or any of those options on. I do a purely minimalistic, as fast as it will go burn.
Edit... oh and all my copys are on the fly, and I never turn data verify or any of those options on. I do a purely minimalistic, as fast as it will go burn.
Johnny Knoxville
Disabled
- Joined
- May 29, 2002
Tipycol said:
YOU GUYS HAVE COMPLETELY BEEN SUCKERED BY THE RIAA.
The only difference between "audio" labeled cd's and normal ones is that the RIAA take royalty from each "audio" cd sold, so you'll be paying more for the same thing. So do yourself and me a favor don't buy those cds.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2000
Lithan said:
You may think that all your data has burned without errors, but when you eventually go back to copy some stuff off you'll find it's corrupted. Feel free not to listen to anyone else, but cheap-o CDRs are very unreliable. When your data counts you don't rely on a cheap-o (and if it doesn't matter to you, why bother burning it at all?).
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2001
- Location
- Houston, Texas
Nagorak said:
thats why backing up data on a cd is worthless..who knows if its good or not..i take my chances archiving everything on my HD's, i use my friends comps for backups
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2002
- Location
- Hampton Roads. VA
Nice info UnseenMenace. Thanks.
UnseenMenace hit it on the spot.
I'd like to point out that there ARE differences between CDs. Some media burns better and some doesn't. Cheap blanks are likely to degrade more quickly, lose data due to mechanical stress, etc. Remember CD-Rs (whether audio or otherwise) aren't 'real' CDs, only simulations. A real CD (One that comes off a pressing plants) has physical pits and lands, which a CD-R simulates through a change in dye (light and dark) to represent data. The composition of the dye and its application have a lot to do with how well a player can read back data, or indeed how well a writer can write to it.
Audio CDs also sound different. A CD-R copy to me sounds distinctly inferior to the original audio CD. Specially on a system that can reveal the shortcomings, as you'll find with any audiophile. All commercial CD players, including CD-ROMS, come with built-in error correction to make up for read errors due to tracking and servo. This error correction ensures that even the same CD will not play *exactly* the same way twice. The difference is mostly inaudible to the human ear, but that does not make it go away. Sometimes it will produce and audible artifact, known as a 'skip' or a 'gap'. Very high quality players can correct even these kind of errors through advanced presampling techniques, but they are still errors.
Do a small experiment.
Copy a audio CD on to CD-R. Play it back.
Now scrub it so that the surface has a lot of scratches (a sheet of paper is ideal). Play it back again...
This is the closest one can get to explaining differences in CDs, unless you can actually do an A/B comparison. Try to figure out where you can access a good system (high-end separates, not the stuff sold as excuses to hi-end) and try out a Mitsubishi Blue Azo, and your regular best Buy CD-R along with an original audio CDs. Listen for a while. Preferably the entire disc, then one song at a time. You'll see what I mean.
I'd like to point out that there ARE differences between CDs. Some media burns better and some doesn't. Cheap blanks are likely to degrade more quickly, lose data due to mechanical stress, etc. Remember CD-Rs (whether audio or otherwise) aren't 'real' CDs, only simulations. A real CD (One that comes off a pressing plants) has physical pits and lands, which a CD-R simulates through a change in dye (light and dark) to represent data. The composition of the dye and its application have a lot to do with how well a player can read back data, or indeed how well a writer can write to it.
Audio CDs also sound different. A CD-R copy to me sounds distinctly inferior to the original audio CD. Specially on a system that can reveal the shortcomings, as you'll find with any audiophile. All commercial CD players, including CD-ROMS, come with built-in error correction to make up for read errors due to tracking and servo. This error correction ensures that even the same CD will not play *exactly* the same way twice. The difference is mostly inaudible to the human ear, but that does not make it go away. Sometimes it will produce and audible artifact, known as a 'skip' or a 'gap'. Very high quality players can correct even these kind of errors through advanced presampling techniques, but they are still errors.
Do a small experiment.
Copy a audio CD on to CD-R. Play it back.
Now scrub it so that the surface has a lot of scratches (a sheet of paper is ideal). Play it back again...
This is the closest one can get to explaining differences in CDs, unless you can actually do an A/B comparison. Try to figure out where you can access a good system (high-end separates, not the stuff sold as excuses to hi-end) and try out a Mitsubishi Blue Azo, and your regular best Buy CD-R along with an original audio CDs. Listen for a while. Preferably the entire disc, then one song at a time. You'll see what I mean.
I had read all the messages and i think that no one had reply to the actual question ..
The companies produce Audio CDR media , simply because they are in the market Audio CDR burners for home use .
They get connected on your HiFi sound system and you record what ever you like on them ..
This HiFi Audio burners ,does not recognize common CDR disks , the reason is simple , there is something to do with the companies and the protection of the singers rights .
The named as Audio CDR ,they have one digital signature on them , and they cost more than common CDR's ,simply because there is some tax added ,that goes back in the music companies .
There is no differences in the media quality at all .
But the general rule , does not bend even in this area , like that the cheapos media is not good for anything .
The companies produce Audio CDR media , simply because they are in the market Audio CDR burners for home use .
They get connected on your HiFi sound system and you record what ever you like on them ..
This HiFi Audio burners ,does not recognize common CDR disks , the reason is simple , there is something to do with the companies and the protection of the singers rights .
The named as Audio CDR ,they have one digital signature on them , and they cost more than common CDR's ,simply because there is some tax added ,that goes back in the music companies .
There is no differences in the media quality at all .
But the general rule , does not bend even in this area , like that the cheapos media is not good for anything .
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
Because of home stand alone consumer recorders and the RIAA, they require Audio-CDR. The Audio-CDR has a special flag set in the inner track that identify the media as a Audio-CDR. Most consumer cd recorders require Audio-CDR because of the fact that the RIAA is greedy and requires payment for every Audio-CDR sold. There is no difference between regular CDR and Audio-CDR media other then the set flag.
If you have a CDR(W) burner for your computer, dont even bother with Audio-CDR media. Its just a waste of money. If you have a stand alone burner with your audio setup, test it out to see if it will accept regular CDR media. If it does, congradulations! You too can now join the fight against the RIAA and use regular CDR media in your home burner.
And sangram, although there may be differences in audio quality from the original to a copy, its mainly because of the method used to rip the data from the original and the way cd-audio is read off the cd media.
Because most cd copying programs caters to the "I need it done yesterday" impatient crowd, the burst method of copy commonly used will NOT give you a bit for bit copy of the original. It will instead, generate numerous errors and imperfections in the audio stream, and will of course produce a copy that is not 100% equal to the original. Depending on the quality of the original (brand new fresh from the plastic, or scratched up) and the cd reader used, you can get an extreamly bad copy of the audio. That will of course show up as anomolies; skips, hiccups, split second silence, etc, in the copied audio.
Exact Audio Copy (EAC) is the only audio cd copier I know of that will give you a near bit for bit perfect copy of the original. I suggest you give that program a try (peferably with a new, un scratched cd) and see if you can hear a difference then.
Also, high speed recording of CDR may cause the media to be unreadable in some consumer cd players, and can also generate read errors that would cause anomolies to appear when you try to play the cd in anything other then the original recorder.
If you have a CDR(W) burner for your computer, dont even bother with Audio-CDR media. Its just a waste of money. If you have a stand alone burner with your audio setup, test it out to see if it will accept regular CDR media. If it does, congradulations! You too can now join the fight against the RIAA and use regular CDR media in your home burner.
And sangram, although there may be differences in audio quality from the original to a copy, its mainly because of the method used to rip the data from the original and the way cd-audio is read off the cd media.
Because most cd copying programs caters to the "I need it done yesterday" impatient crowd, the burst method of copy commonly used will NOT give you a bit for bit copy of the original. It will instead, generate numerous errors and imperfections in the audio stream, and will of course produce a copy that is not 100% equal to the original. Depending on the quality of the original (brand new fresh from the plastic, or scratched up) and the cd reader used, you can get an extreamly bad copy of the audio. That will of course show up as anomolies; skips, hiccups, split second silence, etc, in the copied audio.
Exact Audio Copy (EAC) is the only audio cd copier I know of that will give you a near bit for bit perfect copy of the original. I suggest you give that program a try (peferably with a new, un scratched cd) and see if you can hear a difference then.
Also, high speed recording of CDR may cause the media to be unreadable in some consumer cd players, and can also generate read errors that would cause anomolies to appear when you try to play the cd in anything other then the original recorder.
Similar threads
