making copies of an original cd, lose quality?
Apr 2, 2004 at 5:03 AM Post #2 of 22
depends on what you're using to copy. most people around here including myself swear by EAC (exact audio copy) as software. i'm sure you can google it to find where to download it.

as long as you don't burn faster than 4x and don't use those crappy translucent cd-r's i think you should be fine. apparently you can gain quality if you do a proper burn to those black cd-r's.
 
Apr 2, 2004 at 5:21 AM Post #3 of 22
Use EAC and make sure that your read and write offset values are set properly for your particular drive(s). I have also heard that the Black CD-Rs have the potential to live longer than the original CD itself, but am not sure that I believe that. Either way, I use the black ones b/c they look better than the generics AND there is the chance that they might last longer.

Check the web for tips and hints for using EAC. I would recommmend checking out "coasterfactory" (do a search for it) and hydrogenaudio.org for info..
 
Apr 2, 2004 at 5:57 AM Post #5 of 22
4x, what chu talkin bout, goose? Real men use 1x
rolleyes.gif
Well, no. My burner is a fairly old 12x/4x/24x, I usually burn at 8x unless I'm in a massive rush, or it's just something I don't care about, then I use 12x for the minute or two it saves. Most people I've discussed it with say 8x shouldn't cause any problems.

Then, of course, there's the people that say a bit is a bit, and it doesn't matter what you use, how fast you burn, or the media. Yes, a bit is a bit, and yes, error checking will likely correct any mistakes there may be, and anyway, the errors are so miniscule you won't notice them. Still, there's something to be said for as perfect as you can get backups. I like them, anyway
biggrin.gif


(-:Stephonovich:)
 
Apr 2, 2004 at 6:13 AM Post #6 of 22
I really hate that article from that genesis guy who claims black CD's are better. I don't buy his claims and I cannot find any other evidence from other CD-R forums to completely back up his claims (Of course, my search skills are bad). I think the black CD was a marketing ploy to rip off people who were pirating playstation games back in the late 90's.

I can't find any consistent consensus about which software produces perfect digital duplication of an audio CD. Some people claim disk-at-once copying methods may give perfrect digital duplication, but I have not found anything elaborating that claim (and it seems like the definition of perfect is obscured too). Supposedly cloneCD is suppose to be really good at building digital duplications, but that program has been discontinued because the EU started enforcing digital copyright laws.

Obviously most of us can't stamp CD's, so we can't get a physical duplication of it.
 
Apr 2, 2004 at 6:16 AM Post #7 of 22
Quote:

Originally posted by pedxing
I really hate that article from that genesis guy who claims black CD's are better.


i forget what that guy claims but if you do a search on why the green felt tip pen treatment works, i think the benefits are along the same lines.

i don't use them by the way. i'm too cheap.
tongue.gif
(i don't do the felt tip pen thing either. that just seems silly even if it does yield marginal improvement)
 
Apr 2, 2004 at 2:35 PM Post #8 of 22
The argument the guy makes about black CD-Rs is twofold:

1. By burning a copy you get deeper more pronounced pits on your media than you do with a regular pressed CD, making it easier for you CDP to read (but this will be true for any kind of CD-R black or not

2. The black surface is less reflective of the laser beam reading the pits, therefore you get more accurate reads with lower jitter.

Note that in neither case are you making a *superior copy* in and of itself, all your doing is copying the *same data* onto a medium (black CD-R) that in itself is easier for your CD player to read more accurately.

Not saying I agree with his theories, I've used the black CD-Rs, and I can't tell any difference from other high-quality CDRs like Taiyo Yudens. Maybe with more time, and careful comparisons I could hear it, don't know.
 
Apr 2, 2004 at 3:41 PM Post #9 of 22
Burning at lower speeds isn't always better. I've seen several tests where burning at 1X creates MANY more C1/C2 errors than burning at say, 16X. It all depends on the media, and the burner as well I suppose. With some, 2X is better, 4X, etc.

I've actually done a blind test with my brother using an original CD, and an EAC-copied black CD-R. The black CD-R ended up sounding better. The differences were very small, but they were there. This probably all depends on the CDP as well. To reiterate what markl said, there's no way to improve the data, there's just a slim chance it can be read "better." Which goes along with many of the CD tweaks out there(mats, zappers, pens, oils, rubs, mountain llamas, etc).
 
Apr 2, 2004 at 4:22 PM Post #10 of 22
Does speed matter?
I don't think so, as long as you use a reliable hardware and software. And Audio CD from this point is no different from data CD, just digitally encoded data 101. If there would be a problem with higher burn speed all data CD would came out with corrupted data and that not happening, wait a minute, it happened to me a couple of times until I replaced my CDRW/DVD drive with MAT****A UJDA740 (this thing is an animal).

Forgot to mention that used media matters too. I have got fairly good results with TDK.
 
Apr 2, 2004 at 4:45 PM Post #11 of 22
If you use EAC, regardless of the burn speed (burnproof enabled, of course), you wont create a noticeably degraded copy until at least 4-6 generations later, even on the most sensitive of equipment.
 
Apr 2, 2004 at 10:37 PM Post #14 of 22
Is there any reason not to do a direct copy from drive to drive? It seems like it would be the most efficient way and have less chance for errors, especially if you verify the data.
 
Apr 3, 2004 at 12:43 AM Post #15 of 22
Quote:

Originally posted by aphex944
Burning at lower speeds isn't always better. I've seen several tests where burning at 1X creates MANY more C1/C2 errors than burning at say, 16X. It all depends on the media, and the burner as well I suppose. With some, 2X is better, 4X, etc.


Finally someone that knows what he's talking about.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top