colonelkernel8
Headphoneus Supremus
I should have be more exact in my post - what is actually meant to showcase the benefits of CDmat is RECORDING LIVE MUSIC - directly to CD-R or CD-RW disc.
Here, most of the error correction measures are reduced to the bare minimum - of course, the machine can not buffer in its memory something that has not even happened yet, etc... There is no computer software that can measure data errors in this case - or, at least, not something that has been available and affordable say 15 years ago.
Optical reading/recording is nowhere as "perfect" as some would like lead you to believe. It was a revelation to have find the last few gold CD-Rs from BASF on the shelf in a mall I used to briefly work at - less than 10 pcs, used up in 2 or maybe 3 recording sessions. Then, searching for yet more gold CD-Rs, it turned out that they were, about a decade ago, a dissapearing breed - cost for so called archival media has simply been to much for normal users. There was no denying gold CDs sound better than normal variety - but becoming unavailable - FAST. I have been searching for any "replacement" - archival or anything that might offer similar quality and longeivity. And found I did... - luckily, promo sale of then brand new CD-Rs were also compatible with Philips/Marantz CD-R ( pro ) recorders - which are otherwise quite picky beasts when it comes to media. That hunch/gamble paid off greatly - but it could have also backfired badly; one does not, at least not usually, buy at unseen/unheard/untested - 1000 CD-Rs in a single batch ( 10 boxes with 100 CD-Rs each ). These offered an unmistakable improvement in the sound quality obtainable from CD-R/RW recorders.
As with everything that is overachiever ( offers way too much vs asking price ), this product has been rather quickly terminated - but is, at least to my knowledge, the best CD-R, exceeding even gold variety. The claim was for archival use ( > 100 years ), so far I could not find any problems with by now over a decade old discs - already recorded or still blank.
And then came the CD mat. Again, offering improvement in CD-R/RW recording. Both the mentioned disks and mat have also been used for CD-R burning by computer - with the reservation no spinning above about 4x normal playback of the burner drive takes place - ever.
But, usually, I burn my CD-Rs with SLOWER speed than 1x - Yamaha's AMQR (Audio Master Quality Recording) https://usa.yamaha.com/files/download/brochure/1/320331/CDR-HD1300_U_bro.pdf .
Compared to normal CD-R burning , which allows 80 minute of audio on 700MB disk, AMQR only allows slightly above 63 minutes of audio. Burning 63 minutes of audio takes at "1x" speed slightly below 90 min - IIRC. It has been a while since I last burned a CD-R ...
It has been first available in computer burners - CRW-F1, both in-built and standalone USB version (which has quite good sounding analog RCA out ! ). To this day, these drives will sparkle bidding wars on ebay... particularly the NOS samples.
Properly done AMQR recorded disc will outplay any commercially available CD, even if it has been derived from it (preferably ripped and data verified ) - couple that to both ripping and recording done using CD mat, and it is sure to put smile on your face and raised eyebrows on anyone who has not heard CD in this quality before.
As you can see, standard CD DOES have problems with jitter - at its very source, the disc itself. And that could be far worse a problem than the jitter in the DACs. I know most listen today to RBCD from the CDs ripped to hard drive, that CD players are dying bred, etc.
But the need for stabilization of optical discs in SACD players is still very much there - unless you are willing to fiddle with SACD ripping, which most definitely WILL turn you into an - ebay hawk. The number of old(er) models of Sony Playstation ( before they ripped almost everything supporting SACD out... ) that are indispensable for (unofficial, of course ) ripping of SACDs at home level, available for sale, is ever dwindling - which drives the cost of remaining NOS units ever higher.
What kind of fool would record direct to disc? If the recorded data is in the digital domain, this serves NO purpose. It can be buffered in memory and the burned to the disc at its leisure with tons of error checks along the way. Recording directly to disc is the definition of audiophool nonsense.
"There was no denying gold CDs sound better than normal variety." The very definition of bull.
"These offered an unmistakable improvement in the sound quality obtainable from CD-R/RW recorders." bull.
"And then came the CD mat. Again, offering improvement in CD-R/RW recording." bull.
"Properly done AMQR recorded disc will outplay any commercially available CD." bull.
"and it is sure to put smile on your face and raised eyebrows on anyone who has not heard CD in this quality before." Purely subjective bull.
"As you can see, standard CD DOES have problems with jitter." bull.
"But the need for stabilization of optical discs in SACD players is still very much there." bull.
"unless you are willing to fiddle with SACD ripping, which most definitely WILL turn you into an - ebay hawk." I found a Pioneer Blu-Ray/SACD player on eBay for $50 and I can run a script on it that lets me rip the SACDs. It's really, really easy and cheap. I've ripped some symphonic music using it that I had on the mostly useless DSD format. But I've already ripped my last SACD, so I'll tell you what, if you want my Pioneer Blu-Ray/SACD player, I'll sell it to you for $1000. How about that!
It seems you can't help but make ridiculous assertions without evidence, so I will employ Hitchen's razor and suggest everything stated thus far can simply be discarded.
Last edited: