Difference in burning audio with a PC burner or a dedicated outboard burner?

  • Thread starter Thread starter alonso
  • Start date Start date
My nephew claims that, in his opinion, CDRs burned on his standalone sound way better than his PC burner's, but that's just one opinion from one standalone and one PC. I've read a lot of posts on this forum before I bought my PC for recording 2 years ago and not one made the claim that standalones sound better. If I'd read it, I certainly would have bought a standalone instead of a Plextor. I'd think if it were true that standalones sound better, there would have been a lot of posts on the subject- especially in view of the picky members of this forum.
 
Brian, I think you could be right. But I recall reading on MIX, some top guy said he used a stand alone because the PC ones sound harsh and britle and that there was a huge difference in sound, and it wasn´t an add, so that was that got this ball rolling.
 
Alonso, here's a page you might find useful : http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq05.html#S5-12
From what I gather from this is that the 'top guy' from Mix may have been using a pro standalone. Still, this mystifies me as to why it would sound better than a PC burner. It could be that the 'top guy' from Mix may not know beans about PC recording and may have had a cheap MOBO unsuitable for pro burning. Not being an expert on the subject myself, I can't say for sure, but there's one thing I do know and that's that there are so many variables with PC recording that there may be a bunch of reasons why one person may claim to have better sound with this than that. The difference may have nothing at all to do with whether one burns from a standalone or PC burner.
 
Cool link, maybe the benefit of a stand alone is if you have a crappy souncard, the audio converters are better on the stand alone, but if you have a good soundcard, there might be no benefit....hmmmmmm;)
 
Why would a CD burner need converters?

Why would a CD burner need converters?

Off the top of my head I can think of 2 reasons:

#1. Playback. This is irrelevant because this doesn't affect CD writing quality.

#2. Real-time burning. I mean like pushing play on the tape deck and dubbing directly to CD (possibly connected by those XLR inputs mentioned)

But I'm sure that for most audio applications, CDs are written from PCM audio data (WAV, AIFF) or some compressed format (mp3, wma, ogg, etc.) where there is NO conversion needed.

So who needs converters? We all do, but not for CD burning ;)
 
I agree, MrLip. The converters shouldn't make a difference unless the guy was using them to playback the CD through the same audio system he was using to playback the standalone through. That wouldn't be a very accurate comparison though. Other components of the PC could make a difference though.

From a purely subjective viewpoint, I'm happy with the recordings I've made from my Plextor PC burner. I haven't noticed the harshness and brittleness some have complained about with digital recordings- but then maybe I'm not as picky as a pro engineer might be. I console myself with the fact that a lot of the best music ever recorded was done on really primitive equipment. I think if you get caught up too much in the technical aspects of 'getting the best sound', you'll never get anything recorded. There is simply too much to learn and that knowledge is increasing rapidly daily.
 
Uhhh, I thought I was confused but now I know I am

So you guys are saying that an A/D converter isn't needed to take an analog signal that is coming into a digital device to record that signal digitally? How's that work?
And Brian I agree, it is SO easy to get caught up in spending $500 more on Brand X because the THD is .00000025 % lower than Brand Y. And look at what Sam Phillips and Berry Gordy had and what they did with it.
 
Re: Uhhh, I thought I was confused but now I know I am

MikeA said:
So you guys are saying that an A/D converter isn't needed to take an analog signal that is coming into a digital device to record that signal digitally? How's that work?
And Brian I agree, it is SO easy to get caught up in spending $500 more on Brand X because the THD is .00000025 % lower than Brand Y. And look at what Sam Phillips and Berry Gordy had and what they did with it.
Click to expand...

to just reply to the berry gordy and sam phillips remark i'm almost positive sonically aware pros would say they have as good or better sounding equipment then the majority of pro studios
 
Standalone burner or standalone recorder? A CD recorder would have onboard D/A and A/D, I assume.

A burner attached to the PC obviously would not, but would use the converters on the soundcard.

There are special mechanisms for reading CDs that cost upto $50,000 and more. These are just that, a mechanism. They are mounted onto metal spikes and placed in acoustically correct environments for audiophiles that can afford them, with 1-bit converters and 16x oversampling circuits attached to them for sonically real experience.

The CD format builds error correction capability into the players. Any missed bits will be skipped, and a lot of us will not be able to miss those missing bits. The missing bits are the key to the sound, really. I have noticed a difference in the way my car plays back CDs recorded at 4x and 24x. Not sound quality per se, but seek times and skipping increase with bit rates.

Obviously, there are a bunch of variables. Oh, and BTW, a standalone will always record at 1x. Always. think about that, too.
 
So you guys are saying that an A/D converter isn't needed to take an analog signal that is coming into a digital device to record that signal digitally? How's that work?
Click to expand...

No, MikeA we're not saying that. We're talking about digital audio that's already on your PC and copying it to CDR. You don't need A/D converters to do that because the audio's already digital. Of course, if you want to record your miked vocals or guitar into the PC, you'd need A/D converters then, but, as MrLip said, we're not talking about recording direct to CD. First (as an example) you record the analog audio into the PC using the A/D converters. Then when you burn it to CDR, you've already got digital audio. The sound comparisons (between standalone and PC burner) we're making here aren't about the full recording process- just the burning of already converted digital audio to CD. Clear enough? If not, just picture copying CD to CD; no A/D converters needed there right? That's because it's already in digital format. I'm probably wasting my digital breath because you've probably already figured this out for yourself, right? :-)

Sangram you make a good point- but I think most standalones also burn at 2X, right? Still, that's more limiting than with a PC burner.
 
Thanks Brian,

And yes I did have that figured out. I was responding to Alonso, who posted the question:

quote:
but then why are there these burners for audio that have XRL Inputs, digital inputs and some other stuff that go for $500 and more.and that promise great audio quality...if it would be the same to use your $50 Plextor
end quote

I was simply trying to point out that those recorders who have the analog inputs (XLR, 1/4", RCA, whatever...) will have A/D converters that if used, will have some effect on the sound. And, I would think that if you have a Soundblaster card and a mic preamp and you bring the signal into the analog inputs of it as well as to the standalone CD recorder that the standalone would most likely win the shootout. Now, if you are going taking your analog signal into a Paris, a MOTU, a Digi001 or like that it will give the standalone a run for its money. It just seemed like the thread got twisted a little bit when Alonso was simply asking if there would be an audible difference between a standalone and an onboard. Going digital to digital I doubt it. Going thru the analog inputs, I definitely believe so.
 
OK, MikeA, sorry for the misunderstanding and for being pedantic. I just wanted to make sure that you knew and that you weren't left hanging, but I guess you already did know.:D

You're definitely right about the differences with quality of sound with different soundcards.
 
prpbably more expenisve becase they are standalone. they need to include more hardware to make them work than a regular internal cd burner.

People with out comptuers using digital work sations and adats need them so they can charge them more.
 
who has to pay more? the sucker buying the equipment or the sucker that hires the guy that has the gear? JA!:D
 
You guys obviously have it figured out, I just need to post. Stand alone doesn't need anything but an audio input. Say for someone without a daw, recording analog, it's a quick easy way to get it to disk.
 
PS. Sorry alonzo, I'm posting as quickly as possible so you can have your avatar back...
 
No problem man, but I am getting tired of doing these little hops all day!!!!! And I think this red outfit doesn´t do me any justice neither:D
 
But seeing as this IS an opportunity for another post closer to that goal...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top