Audio CD Burners

Hondaman · Mar 11, 2003

<font color='#000000'>I am looking to purchase an audio cd burner and need some advice.
All I really want to do is transfer some of my old 33 albums to Cds so I can take them with me in the car.
All the options are confusing me and I don't know what I need.
Is there a simple unit that will do a decent job at a reasonable price?
I am not interested in all the dubbing and fancy recording stuff, just simple transfers from Vinyl or CD to CD.
Thanks for GOOD advice!</font>

quadophile · Mar 12, 2003

<font color='#0000FF'>Plextor, Teac and Lite-On have good reputation as far as burners are concerned. I personally prefer the Plextor, being an audiophile. I have two of them in use, one being 12/10/32A which I had bought in early 2000 and the newest one bought just few months back 48/24/48U which is an external one. Never had any problems.

Just the burner will not do the trick, you will also need a good sound card to go with it as well as proper software for conversion. I am not sure what you have currently nor I am able to make out how much you want to spend on the whole thing. Quality costs money, how far you want to go up is really your own decision

The choice is yours!</font>

Yamahaluver · Mar 12, 2003

quadophile : <font color='#000000'>Plextor, Teac and Lite-On have good reputation as far as burners are concerned. I personally prefer the Plextor, being an audiophile. I have two of them in use, one being 12/10/32A which I had bought in early 2000 and the newest one bought just few months back 48/24/48U which is an external one. Never had any problems.

Just the burner will not do the trick, you will also need a good sound card to go with it as well as proper software for conversion. I am not sure what you have currently nor I am able to make out how much you want to spend on the whole thing. Quality costs money, how far you want to go up is really your own decision

The choice is yours!</font>

Although all burners burn well, the best audio use burner was the Yamaha 20x-40x burners with their 'Audio Master' mode which burnt bigger than standard Red Book pits. I use two of them and can tell you the copies sometimes excel the originals.

Too bad Yamaha couldn't compete with Lite-On and other Chinese brands cost wise and quit the CD writer business. However the Audio Master Yamaha burner feature is present in the stand alone audio only Yamaha burners.

TEAC and Lite-On are very solid good burners and in terms of reliability and longeviety they can't be beat.</font>

Audioholics · Mar 13, 2003

<font color='#000000'>While this is all good advice, it involves some set-up (not to mention a computer.)

Your paricular needs may be better served by a set-top standalone unit. It will cost you quite a bit more, but many are available at Best Buy or other online merchants. Lots of these also double as an MP3 (on CD) player.

With these, you simply hook in your analogue or digital audio source and hit 'record'. You can pause recording, and index tracks as you go...

Prices start around $249 shipped.</font>

Hondaman · Mar 13, 2003

<font color='#000000'>Thanks Hawke, You were right on the money and my needs.
Although I have the computer and CD burner, what I want and found was a stand alone audio unit to go with my stereo.
I ordered the Sony RCD-W10 @ $249 and will report my success with it.
All I really want to do is spin the record and record to CD, nothing fancy and my ears can't hear like the old days. I have over 300 Vinyls from the 60s & 70s and always wished I could take them with me in the car CD.
The computer based units sound great and like they might be a much better way but then, I find nothing easy on the PC and want to avoid any problems there. Hondaman</font>

Guest · Mar 15, 2003

<font color='#000000'>Hi Yamahaluver,

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>

Yamahaluver : I use two of them and can tell you the copies sometimes excel the originals.

It's cool that you like the sound of the CD's you burn, but most people want a recording to sound as much like the original as possible. It is generally accepted that the goal of "high-fidelity" is to reproduce recorded sound accurately, and a recording device that changes the sound is not accurate (by definition).

It's like an SET amp. They add harmonics to the sound that many people find pleasing (and that many mistake for higher-fidelity, because they believe that the harmonics are in the music, an don't understand amplifiers at all), and the added harmonics can be very nice, especially with certain types of recordings or loudspeakers (horns, for one). People who like SET amps take a lot of flack, but IMHO, they're entitled to like whatever they like. I do draw a line in the sand however, when they make false claims of superior accuracy. Accuracy means NOT changing the sound or signal, so when a recording doesn't sound identical to the original, it's not an accurate recording.

The Plextor burners are great, if you're using a computer, and have a good sound card or are doing CD rips (which don't even require a sound card).

I've waited for days for someone else to respond to your post, because I didn't want to come across as being confrontational or as if I was looking for an argument. Since no one else seems willing to point out the problem with recordings that don't sound like the original, I guess I got stuck with the job. Hope you're not going to shoot the messenger. ;-)

Party on,

Chuck</font>

Guest · Mar 15, 2003

quadophile said:
Yamahaluver :

quadophile said:

their 'Audio Master' mode which burnt bigger than standard Red Book pits.

Click to expand...

Pits and lands are stamped, not burned. The CD's you "burn" don't have them.

Chuck</font>

Yamahaluver · Mar 15, 2003

quadophile said:
Guest : <font color='#000000'>BTW ...
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote (Yamahaluver @ Mar. 12 2003,07:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

quadophile said:

their 'Audio Master' mode which burnt bigger than standard Red Book pits.

Click to expand...

Pits and lands are stamped, not burned.  The CD's you "burn" don't have them.

Chuck</font></td></tr></table>
<font color='#000000'>I thought the process is known as annealing or burning, one cant expect a laser beam to  physicaly stamp a CD like a die cast machine...............or is it possible now.

</font>

Guest · Mar 16, 2003

Yamahaluver : I thought the process is known as annealing or burning, one cant expect a laser beam to physicaly stamp a CD like a die cast machine...............or is it possible now.

Hi Yamahaluver,

Most CD's are stamped, not burned. See: CD-R VS CD Stamping

Take a look at this link too. Near the bottom of the page you'll find the following statement:

"Thus not the pits or lands itself but the pit edges are responsible for data information."

It is the location of the transition between a pit and a land, or a land and a pit, that is responsible for the information, not the pits and/or lands themselves. If the pits are made longer during the recording process, one of two things will likely happen. Either the change will be too small to make any difference, or it will be long enough to cause the data to be read incorrectly. If it isn't clear why this is the case, after reading the information in the link above, I'll try to track down another Web page that will explain it a little more thoroughly.

"On this page we find the following information:

"A transition between pit and land (either pit to land or land to pit) is a one, and everything else is a zero. Since the data is self-clocked at a constant rate, if the edges of the pits are not in the correct places, errors will be generated."

Here's a description of what's really going on with the Audio Master Quality Recording technology.

In particular, note this statement:

"The reduction of relative jitter by this technique results in a lower capacity disc (63mins vs. 74mins.), but reduces the need for activation of the error correction concealment circuitry and ultimately results in less audio distortion."

The important thing to recognize here is that the technology ONLY WORKS if the "error correction concealment circuitry" is activated. Unless the CD, CD-R, or CD-R/W, is in extremely poor condition, has been abused, or was not stamped or burned properly, L1 error correction will correct every error, and the concealment circuitry will never be activated.

I use a Plextor PleXWriter 12/10/32A (the "A" indicates that special consideration has been given to audio CD reading and burning). Under Linux/Unix using command line routines it is possible to track the number of L2 errors (uncorrectable errors that must be concealed), and when there ARE L2 errors, the CD will not sound quite right. That is, it will not sound quite like the original. Fortunately, L2 errors are extremely rare, at least in my experience. The ONLY time I see them is when one of the CD-R's my wife uses in her Alpine changer (in her car) stops playing properly. The changer eventually scratches up the surface of the CDR's enough for them to stop playing properly, and when I read them on the PC, I get L2 errors constantly. Hopefully we take better care of the CD's we use in the house.

I'm sure the Yamaha burning technology has merit, I'm just not sure that it's something that will make an audible difference under normal circumstances. More likely that there is a difference in the post conversion filtering or analog section after the DAC that is causing the differences you hear.

See ya,

Chuck</font>

quadophile · Mar 17, 2003

Guest : I use a Plextor PleXWriter 12/10/32A (the "A" indicates that special consideration has been given to audio CD reading and burning).

With due respect, The 'A' in 12/10/32A refers to ATAPI not AUDIO. There are two types of drives for your information, SCSI and ATAPI.</font>

Audioholics · Mar 17, 2003

<font color='#000000'>The only scenario I can think of where the "copied" CD is "better" than the original, is when you have dramatic scratches on the source CD, causing errors in a player. Lots of PC burners have good enough error correction to "plow through" the errors and create a new CD, sans scratches.

This is a delicate process, however, as you are looking to correct errors, not conceal them. Generally, burning the new "master CD" at 4x or lower will produce a good CD.

Of course, all of this is off-topic, but makes for good discussion...  

</font>

Guest · Mar 17, 2003

quadophile : <font color='#000000'>With due respect, The 'A' in 12/10/32A refers to ATAPI not AUDIO. There are two types of drives for your information, SCSI and ATAPI.</font>

<font color='#000000'>Not according to Vadim, the cheif engineer at Plextor.  Of course, he could be wrong.  

(He did tell me as much during a phone call about 18 months ago.)

Chuck</font>

Guest · Mar 17, 2003

hawke : The only scenario I can think of where the "copied" CD is "better" than the original, is when you have dramatic scratches on the source CD, causing errors in a player. Lots of PC burners have good enough error correction to "plow through" the errors and create a new CD, sans scratches.

This is a delicate process, however, as you are looking to correct errors, not conceal them. Generally, burning the new "master CD" at 4x or lower will produce a good CD.

Of course, all of this is off-topic, but makes for good discussion...

I have done that, but as you say, it's a "delicate process." Better to keep a very clean copy of the original CD around if possible. I only play copies, and store the originals, and I guess copy protection schemes will soon put an end to that.

When I copy a questionable CD, I use Linux so I can see the L1 and L2 errors, and if there are L2 errors, I just buy a new copy and trash the old one. That's probably a bit anal, but I know when I see L2, there has been a data loss and a cover-up, and I really don't care if I'll be able to hear it. Since I'm starting with a digital format and I'm not changing the data in any way, I expect a clone, and if you have an L2 error during the process you don't get that.

I've taken a closer look at the Yamaha scheme, and basically, they are spreading the data out over a larger area. This will cause the audio CD player to spin the CD faster, because the spin rate varies to maintain the correct bit rate. By spreading the data out over a larger area, they are reducing the probability of a scratch or other problem clobbering enough data for an L2 error. In some cases when it all comes together just right, I can see that this could eliminate (or reduce) an L2 error (but of course if you're not getting L2's, then it can't matter).

Note that DVD-A uses a higher data density, and it doesn't cause any problems, as long as the media is in good condition (and was manufactured properly).

Hawke, is this really off topic?  Please correct me if I'm wrong, but here's the way I see it ...

Once a question is asked, and answered, and there are technical issues raised as a result, then those issues are the topic.  A board like this needs to attract technical people, to provide good answers, and it seems to me that some good technical exchange might help generate more interest.  As long as it doesn't turn the forum into AR or AA, it seems like a good thing.  Am I wrong?

See ya,

Chuck</font>

Guest · Mar 17, 2003

Guest : <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote (quadophile @ Mar. 17 2003,04:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">With due respect, The 'A' in 12/10/32A refers to ATAPI not AUDIO. There are two types of drives for your information, SCSI and ATAPI.

Not according to Vadim, the cheif engineer at Plextor. Of course, he could be wrong.

(He did tell me as much during a phone call about 18 months ago.)

Chuck</td></tr></table>
BTW, Quadophile, I'm do not intend to imply that you're wrong. Just wanted you to realize that I didn't just make up the thing about the "A."

Chuck</font>

Hondaman · Mar 17, 2003

<font color='#000000'>I see I have started more of a discussion then I can intelligently add to!
I do believe Hawke answered my question and I did order a simple/stupid Sony RCD-W10 recorder.
SO, with all the hype asside, will I get decent CD recordings from my old favorite Vinyls that are in great condition and only ever played sparingly on a Technics SL1200Mk2.
My new machine should arrive in the morning and I will report on the results. Please remember my original queery was for an Audio CD recorder to transfer LPs to CD so I could take them in the auto.

Thanks to all for all the interesting info

</font>

Yamahaluver · Mar 18, 2003

Guest : <font color='#000000'><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote (Yamahaluver @ Mar. 15 2003,21:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I thought the process is known as annealing or burning, one cant expect a laser beam to  physicaly stamp a CD like a die cast machine...............or is it possible now.

Hi Yamahaluver,

Most CD's are stamped, not burned.  See: CD-R VS CD Stamping

Take a look at this link too.  Near the bottom of the page you'll find the following statement:

"Thus not the pits or lands itself but the pit edges are responsible for data information."

It is the location of the transition between a pit and a land, or a land and a pit, that is responsible for the information, not the pits and/or lands themselves.  If the pits are made longer during the recording process, one of two things will likely happen.  Either the change will be too small to make any difference, or it will be long enough to cause the data to be read incorrectly.  If it isn't clear why this is the case, after reading the information in the link above, I'll try to track down another Web page that will explain it a little more thoroughly.

"On this page we find the following information:

"A transition between pit and land (either pit to land or land to pit) is a one, and everything else is a zero. Since the data is self-clocked at a constant rate, if the edges of the pits are not in the correct places, errors will be generated."

Here's a description of what's really going on with the Audio Master Quality Recording technology.

In particular, note this statement:

"The reduction of relative jitter by this technique results in a lower capacity disc (63mins vs. 74mins.), but reduces the need for activation of the error correction concealment circuitry and ultimately results in less audio distortion."

The important thing to recognize here is that the technology ONLY WORKS if the "error correction concealment circuitry" is activated.  Unless the CD, CD-R, or CD-R/W, is in extremely poor condition, has been abused, or was not stamped or burned properly, L1 error correction will correct every error, and the concealment circuitry will never be activated.

I use a Plextor PleXWriter 12/10/32A (the "A" indicates that special consideration has been given to audio CD reading and burning).  Under Linux/Unix using command line routines it is possible to track the number of L2 errors (uncorrectable errors that must be concealed), and when there ARE L2 errors, the CD will not sound quite right.  That is, it will not sound quite like the original.  Fortunately, L2 errors are extremely rare, at least in my experience.  The ONLY time I see them is when one of the CD-R's my wife uses in her Alpine changer (in her car) stops playing properly.  The changer eventually scratches up the surface of the CDR's enough for them to stop playing properly, and when I read them on the PC, I get L2 errors constantly.  Hopefully we take better care of the CD's we use in the house.  

I'm sure the Yamaha burning technology has merit, I'm just not sure that it's something that will make an audible difference under normal circumstances.  More likely that there is a difference in the post conversion filtering or analog section after the DAC that is causing the differences you hear.

See ya,

Chuck</font></td></tr></table>
<font color='#000000'>Hi Chuck,
The Yamaha's 'Audio Master" mode burns bigger pits, it does not however modify sound. Compared to CDs burnt with a normal burner you may or may not find difference. In my experience, some 'Audio Master' CDs I burnt showed a slight improvement over the original specially at high volumes. Never has the data been read incorrectly either on my Accuphase DP-70CV CD player nor on my Yamaha CDX-1050 CP player, even my Yamaha DVD player tracks 'audio master' CDs very well.  CDR Info gave the audio master mode a good response and nothing negative was said about that. Yamaha themselves have given considerable amount of data on jitter effect using normal mode and using the audio master mode. The vagaries of improper pits are pronounced using cheap blanks and the high speed of today's burners don't make the tast easy. I mostly record my audio CDs at the speed of 8x using Mitsubishi/Verbatim Super Azo blanks rated at 40x. This is my way of making sure my audio CDs sound as they are supposed to do with minimal jitter. I guess Yamaha realized that higher speeds in the burner market combined with cheap blanks was reducing the quality of burns so they decided to come with the audio master mode.

Commercialy available CDs are stamped, CDR are burned or anealed on CD writers.

L2 errors are rare when sane people do the burning with a properly working burner and good quality blanks. Due to the easy and cheap avaialbility of cheap blanks too many bad recordings show up frequently now a days. CDR diagnostic is one tool which reveal these anomalies to a plumb. I have had the chance to own all three makes of burners. I had a SCSI version of Plextor 12x and it was indeed a good burner. Now I have two SCSI Yamaha 16x burners, one 40x Yamaha burner which has the audio master mode and one Lite-On which to me is a fantastic deal, very little C2 errors and can burn on any crappy blanks. Good for give aways and when you are in a hurry. Burns at an awesome 52x. speed.

Happy listening.

</font>

quadophile · Mar 18, 2003

Guest : <font color='#000000'><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote (Guest @ Mar. 17 2003,17:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote (quadophile @ Mar. 17 2003,04:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">With due respect, The 'A' in 12/10/32A refers to ATAPI not AUDIO. There are two types of drives for your information, SCSI and ATAPI.

Not according to Vadim, the cheif engineer at Plextor. Of course, he could be wrong.

(He did tell me as much during a phone call about 18 months ago.)

Chuck</td></tr></table>
BTW, Quadophile, I'm do not intend to imply that you're wrong. Just wanted you to realize that I didn't just make up the thing about the "A."

Chuck</font></td></tr></table>
<font color='#0000FF'>Chuck,

I do not have any intention of trolling here on this board but it is important for us to submit information based on facts and/ or personal experience (which should be clarified if possible) and you did.

I am sorry but I cannot except your explanation for the simple reason that all Plextor drives are good for audio and their designation are as follows:

Two types of internal drives
12/10/32A - which denotes an ATAPI Interface
12/10/32S - which denotes a SCSI Intrface

External Drive
4824TU - which denotes External USB Interface

All these drives have similar specification when it comes to audio, Plextor has not mentioned in any of their catalogues that only drives with "A" should be used for Audio.

It does not make any sense to me what you are claiming. Please, please clarify for all of us.

Please do not take it personally.

Anyone else like to share their opinion on this?</font>

Audioholics · Mar 18, 2003

Guest : <font color='#000000'>Hawke, is this really off topic? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but here's the way I see it ...

Once a question is asked, and answered, and there are technical issues raised as a result, then those issues are the topic. A board like this needs to attract technical people, to provide good answers, and it seems to me that some good technical exchange might help generate more interest. As long as it doesn't turn the forum into AR or AA, it seems like a good thing. Am I wrong?</font>

<font color='#000000'>Chuck, you aren't wrong in expanding the discussion... my point was, that the original question was posted by someone wanting to:

"transfer some of my old 33 albums to Cds so I can take them with me in the car. All the options are confusing me and I don't know what I need. Is there a simple unit that will do a decent job at a reasonable price? I am not interested in all the dubbing and fancy recording stuff, just simple transfers from Vinyl or CD to CD."

"Off topic" was just a descriptive note by me indicating that I felt my last contribution didn't really have anything to do with the original post - which it didn't.

Regarding CD copying and errors... I realy must say that one's ears should decide what they are willing to live with. Discounting a copied CD and buying a new one due to any L2 errors seems excessive to me, as does configuring a Linux box just to see these errors... I would think that with this much money to toss around, and this level of audible discernment I am surprised you would even listen to 44.1kHz/16-bit titles at all!

</font>

Guest · Mar 18, 2003

hawke : I realy must say that one's ears should decide what they are willing to live with. Discounting a copied CD and buying a new one due to any L2 errors seems excessive to me, as does configuring a Linux box just to see these errors... I would think that with this much money to toss around, and this level of audible discernment I am surprised you would even listen to 44.1kHz/16-bit titles at all!

If you'll read my earlier post, you will find the following words. "That's probably a bit anal, but I know when I see L2, there has been a data loss and a cover-up, and I really don't care if I'll be able to hear it."

Seems we're in agreement.

Chuck</font>

Audioholics · Mar 18, 2003

quadophile : <font color='#000000'>I am sorry but I cannot except your explanation for the simple reason that all Plextor drives are good for audio and their designation are as follows
[snip]
Anyone else like to share their opinion on this?</font>

<font color='#000000'>My opinion is that you cannot really not accept Chuck's explanation, since he gave you his source. You can only make a correction, which you did.

Not accepting implies purposeful deceit, and I believe you have no grounds for that, and probably didn't intend it to be taken as such. <forrest>and that's all I have to say about that...</gump>

Party on...</font>

Audio CD Burners

Hondaman

Enthusiast

quadophile

Audiophyte

Yamahaluver

Audioholic General

Audioholics

Guest

Hondaman

Enthusiast

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

Yamahaluver

Audioholic General

Guest

Guest

quadophile

Audiophyte

Audioholics

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

Hondaman

Enthusiast

Yamahaluver

Audioholic General

quadophile

Audiophyte

Audioholics

Guest

Guest

Guest

Audioholics

Guest

Latest posts

Sitemap

Sitemap

Site Information

Site Information

HTML