burn as data or wave files?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GrittyG
  • Start date Start date
G

GrittyG

New member
Hello all,
I have a little situation here. I am on Pro Tools Le on a Mac g4. I have tracked the band and the singer wants to do his vocal tracks on his Cubase system, then he is going to send me his vox files for me to mix. My question is, should he burn these files as wave or data files? So if I give him a stereo file of a song, he imports it into Cubase and then he sends the tracks back to me. Theoretically they have the same start time? Does that make sense?
Thanks,
Graham
 
DATA. DATA. DATA.

CDRs are fairly reliable whether data or audio, while DATA CDRs are extremely reliable.

Plus you get a miniscule size advantage with data files vs. audio.

Also data CDRs will allow you to move 24/96 audio whereas CD audio is 16/44.
 
Er, aren't all wave files, data files?

I suspect you meant audio CD versus data CD. If it's a wave file, then by default it is also a data file.

That aside, the Doctor gave you the correct answer. Burn them as wave files on a data CD-R.
 
So does he burn a Data Cd or an audio cd? Just to make it clear.
Graham
 
DOesnt matter. I'd stick with waves myself. It will sound just as good. The transfer from each station is where you get the sound degradation.
 
Dachay is saying it DOES matter.

To avoid the error correction logarithms that are encoded into a wave file when it is burned to AUDIO CD (so that it can be read by consumer CD Players, not just computers) and keep the file as pure as possible, burn a data CD of .wav files, not an audio CD of stereo 16 bit 44.1 audio tracks.
 
Ok ok ok...

First, it's "algorithms", not "logarithms" :)

Secondly, that's partly right.... All you really need to know without getting into technical mumbo jumbo is that audio CD's and audio CD players are designed to play very much like their old analog counterparts. Your audio CD player only has a limited amount of time to read a block of data before that same data is needed by the converters...otherwise your audio CD might just stop playing for a while to catch up...that's unacceptable. So, what an audio CD does when it runs into a problem is try to read the "bad" data as well as it can in the alloted time and if it can't read, one of two things usually happen: a) the CD player interpolates the damaged data (e.g. it guesses) b) if the error is too wide, then you'll get a dropout, or "skip". Now if it's a really bad scratch or smudge, the audio CD player freak out and start skipping trying to get back on track.

When you burn an audio CD, that's the technology you're relying on to preserve your precious data. You can't copy an audio track back to the computer, it has to be "ripped" using special software. While most of the time you will get back a good copy, you are not guaranteed to get what you wrote to the disc!!!!! Now using programs like "exact audio copy" can make the process much safer...you can for the most part tell it to NOT "guess" and inform you of errors, and it'll sit there and try to get "bad" data for as long as it can. This is a lot of hassle and all you're doing is mimicing a data CD!

Data CD's are a different story. You either get your wave file in its entirety as a perfect copy of the original, or you get nothing at all (e.g. "cannot read file, please freak out."). When preserving your audio tracks, a data CD is really the ONLY way you should go.

I should also note that yes, the "algorithms" used to encode data CD's are more robust than those used to encode audio cd's.

Oh, and the comments about an audio cd being limited to 16/44 are of course super valid too!

Slackmaster 2000
 
Ok ok ok...

First, it's "algorithms", not "logarithms"
Click to expand...

I KNEW THAT!!



I was just testin' you all, yeah that's it:rolleyes: make sure you're payin attention, yeah.



Whaddaya' think I'yam dum o'sumthin' ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top