Sound Quality of CDRs vs. Original Manufactured CDs
Jan 14, 2002 at 8:17 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 99

Milestones

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 22, 2001
Posts
125
Likes
10
How does the sound quality of a CDR compare to the consumer manufactured cd it was burned from? Are CDRs basically indentical in sound quality to the cd they are burned from? If there is significant degradation in sound quality - how much of that is dependent on the equipment and process used to burn the CDR?

I don't have a CD burner - but I have been given a few CDRs burned by others and I am just wondering how the sound quality of those discs would compare with the original consumer manufactured disc they are burned from. If I really like the music on my CDRs should I seek out a copy manufactured for retail purchase for an upgrade in the sound quality?

P.S. I only have CDRs of discs which are out of print or incredibly difficult to find - otherwise I would want the artist or their estate to get some money out of the purchase of the music.
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 8:27 PM Post #2 of 99
Yes, they are identical IF you have used software that copies correctly and if it can pull all the bits off the original. I have copied CDs with tick noises regularly spaced only in the copy, a result of
bits not being read properly due to a radial scratch. Copy protection schemes attempt to make this process harder, degrading the sound of the copy because bits are missing.

Digital is digital. Anyone claiming that the same bits from one kind of media sound different to the same bits from another kind of media is just deluded.
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 8:53 PM Post #3 of 99
Quote:

Digital is digital. Anyone claiming that the same bits from one kind of media sound different to the same bits from another kind of media is just deluded


Yep, your CD-R should sound just as bad as the original CD.

biggrin.gif
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 9:04 PM Post #4 of 99
I have about five burned CDRs and I hate the sound quality. I read that hi-speed copies have many digital errors and that hurt the sound. The maximum recommended burning speed is 2X with special 2X media. I have a little story for you: I live in Venezuela. The major recording companies press their releases here, Colombia and Mexico. I found the american copy I buy on Internet sounding better, and we are talking about professional burning machines! What we can expect from home burners?
confused.gif
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 9:09 PM Post #6 of 99
You just have to be careful with your home burner. It might be worth checking out any disc you intend to copy with EAC to make sure you really can read every bit, and cleaning the CD or even re-polishing until you can. Then you would use that same drive as the source drive for the copy. The Plextor drive I use, a 20X burner, is well supported by EAC and fast too.
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 9:12 PM Post #7 of 99
Nobody had responded when I began to write my reply! Yes, digital is digital, but remember that digital error are digital errors too. CD players has a error correction function that actually could change the original sound. CD burners have error rates too, you can found that in their specs. You have also jitter, etc. So digital is not a perfect world. Not yet.
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 9:15 PM Post #8 of 99
Someone told me once that burnng at a faster speed than 1X affects sound quality (he stated that at high volumes the sound will distort). I don't buy it, we're dealing with cassettes, i have a Plextor CDROM and a Plextor 8X burner, both are SCSI and work very when burning from CD to CDR. I have burned albums before, i have not noticed any difference in the sound quality.

George
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 9:20 PM Post #9 of 99
OK, think about this - let's say you have a file that is 640M in length - it fills one whole CD. It uses a very secure checksum, for argument's sake, let's say MD5, often used by companies like Sun on binary distributions of software to ensure that the file you receive has not been altered by a third party.

Will you agree that if that file is on one CD it is possible to copy it on to a hard disk, and with the checksum verify that every single bit was transferred correctly? How about CD to CD? If so, you must also agree that it is not just possible, but relatively easy to make a bit-perfect copy of an audio CD.

After that, any difference between a CD-R and a manufactured copy of a music CD is purely imagination.
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 10:03 PM Post #10 of 99
I know what you are all saying, digital is digital. So is all CD players, and why do you think the one that cost more sounds better? If this "Digital is Digital" theory applies?

There's more to it then missing bits, obviously that's important. There's the fact that the refection factor on CD-R are lower then manufactured CDs. The "grove" is not burned in a professional CD compare to a PC-burner.

You might not be able to tell in consumer range HiFi, but when you get to $3000+ speakers system, the difference is obvious. The difference won't be in terms of hiss and cracks but in timing, ambience....

Is it worth getting it again? If there isn't any cracking noise, then I say that 98% of the sound is there.
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 10:13 PM Post #11 of 99
I don't get it. How is it that you people think that software is distributed on CDs and burned onto CDs and works perfectly (when a bitflip in the wrong place can screw hell into an executable) but you don't think that digital audio is digital?

Some drives don't rip audio correctly, and this will cause your pops and whatever else. Burning is burning, though.
 
Jan 14, 2002 at 10:41 PM Post #12 of 99
Bah! We've seen CD-RW drives that burn CD-Rs at speeds of 24x and even 32x!
mad.gif
But in my experience I'd recommend the slowest rated continuous burning speed on a given CD-RW drive in order to attain the best quality and reliability. Refer to the owners manual for specifics - and don't always trust the slowest settings available through your CD-R/RW burning software. (For my TDK 24/10/40x drive, that minimum continuous writing speed is 4x; although my Nero software can be set to burn at 1x, the drive actually burns at a much faster speed than 1x - which may cause problems with some players. So, with that drive, use 4x, not 1x.) Hope this helps.
 
Jan 15, 2002 at 12:17 AM Post #13 of 99
It can be better, it can be worse, it can be identical.

Better if your original was worn or just not pressed well, and with a good ripper and burner hardware/software you produce a better copy. How is this possible? Because a ripper is not constricted to real-time audio performance and will take all the time alloted to it to extract the bits and perform necessariy error correction.

Worse if you don't have ideal burner, software, hardware, and the original copy happened to be good. Or your player happens to have a hard time with the CDR media in question.

Identical if the transport you happen to use for audio also takes the time to buffer and re-read the audio at faster than 1x. Notice that most home audio players besides Meridians do not do this. PCDP's with anti-shock mechanisms do this, wheter or not the buffer quality and mechanism produces extremely low jitter is debatable. Winamp + CD reader plugin may do this, but unless you have a very quiet computer, with an exceptional pro-audio card and DAC, the advantages will not really show through since the computer environment itself is mechanically and electrically noisy, and induces jitter more than average home audio players in the first place.

Digital is digital, however CD's are not *exactly* digital...they are analog media in the sense that pits are analog...it is the conversion of the spacing of analog pits into discrete values that is digital. It is during this conversion process where differences may present themselves although slight. So a CD doesn't really contain discrete values...it contains pits which are converted into digital. If these pits are allowed to be re-read until the resultant data is transcribed correctly, than it is identical. If they are read only once...than the transcription is not guaranteed to be bit perfect. Analog is anything in the real world, digital is an abstraction of analog for the purpose of reliability, and duplication or manipulation of data. The CD only becomes a digital entity when read by a transport which could be considered an Analog -> Digital stage, although probably a very reliable and robust one. Without the transport, it is just a disc with spaced out pits, and hence analog in nature. Transports are not always perfection. Course the whole point of digital is in fact to remove distortions of analog nature, but we are also talking about a real-time non mission-critical application. Again if you are using winamp + CD-reader you are telling your system that you don't want it read once...you want to utilize system memory as a large buffer, and you want it read to the best ability and most redundancy you can offer. If you believe the CD-reader plugin offers you better performance than other digital CD-readers, than digital isn't really just digital anymore is it.

If you have an extremely fast CDROM you may notice some CD's or CDR's spin and read faster than others...while others apparently induce enough errors to tell the CDROM, "hey I'm getting too many read errors, slow down please". Because of computer technology, people get spoiled by how much is done behind the scenes that they tend to think things are either perfect, or broken, but there definitely is a grey area. These error messages aren't going to flash up on your OS, they are part of the OS and CDrom drivers and firmware.

Also did you know most hard drives are not bit perfect devices that are *exactly* digital. There is a level of performance provided by magnetic media which although very high, is not bit perfect...and as such hard drives automatically will contain more space than specified and although there are probably non-read/writable areas on the harddrive it will automatically use the extra space without you knowing. This is called defect management and is entirely different from "bad sectors" which is on the operating system level, not hardware level. If you see bad sectors reported from the OS, its probably because it had difficulty reading and writing, and basically performs defect management on its on (hence low-level formats can remove bad sectors...but if a hard drive is just bad, those bad sectors will probably come back). Again hard-drives are not always just perfect, or broken, but definitely have grey areas of performance and reliability as well. Same as CD's.

You can go out and buy hard-drives and think only of speed, GB's, and price...but those that know better know about quality.
 
Jan 15, 2002 at 1:09 AM Post #15 of 99
Quote:

Originally posted by becomethemould
to keep it short. i have some burnt cdrs. TDK ones, not audio version. i've noticed on my former senny mx500s that they are extremely bright sounding.. harsh treble compared to a original cd. i copied at 6x.


Sorry, but this is, in a word, impossible.

With digital, the copying is done entirely in the digital domain, and any errors exist in the digital domain -- 1s become 0s at random, or vice versa. This does not produce "colored" or "tainted" music; it changes the character of the data so that it doesn't resemble music at all. If the bit copy was flawed, meaning some bits were copied correctly, and others weren't, the sound would be seriously distorted (large enough strings of errors produce clicking sounds in the music, assuming the error rate is low enough. If the error rate is high, the 'music' will simply sound like a buzzing noise, as random 1s and 0s would sound being translated by a DAC). It can't simply sound "brighter" due to copy imperfections.

With analog media the problem you describe can happen, due to miscalibration of the read/write mechanisms and/or the intervening circuitry, noise reduction routines, etc.

If the bits were copied correctly, then there is absolutely no change in sound.

You can (and I have) compared the data from the original CD to the data on CD-Rs at every burn speed up to 8x (the fastest writer I currently have at my disposal.) I have NEVER had even a single bit different.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top