Is IT worth buying a proper CD recorder

D

desmond22

New member
so got the 8 track going well, got a nice DAT recorder, but still need to get the music onto Disc. I have been using pro tools and the computer burner, but i have a feeling that the CD recorders are better, plus i want to keep the computer out of the loop.
Is there much of a positive sonic difference using a CD recorder or am i just a gear whore??
 
If you're going to mix directly onto the CD then I'd say it was worth getting a CD recorder. I've been using one since 1999 and it's the lick !
 
Stand alone CD recorders tend to have better A/D converters in them compared to what's in the average computer. So yeah, it's worth it.

Cheers! :)
 
Thing is...with computer CD burners there is no A/D conversion, since that was done by the interface that brought the audio into the computer.
Your files are already converted in the DAW...so any good quality computer CD burner will do a fine job, just use good quality media.

Plextor computer CD burners use to be some of the better choices back in the day...but I think now you can find a lot of good ones.

I have a quality standalone burner...but I rarely use it, only if I'm going to burn something on the fly.
All of my final mixes are made with the computer CD burner....and it's a Plextor.
 
Yeah, a standalone Cd Burner shouldn't compared with your computer's internal CD burner, they aren't the same thing. The benefits of using a standalone cd burner is that some of them have really good quality A/D converters. Now... how does a standalone CD burner compare to an equivalently priced audio interface? I'm asking myself the same thing.
 
Here's another thing to think about....

Most standalone CD burners are converting the audio to 16/44.1 as they burn the CD...even if they are 24bit on their front end, which means they are also dithering down from 24 to 16, and you can’t choose the type.
If that's what you want...fine, but an A/D interface converts at your desired bit/sample rate...and leaves it there. You make the final decisions when you mix/master...etc.

Most standalone burners are designed with the idea that your are burning the “final pass”. With computer A/D interfaces and CD burners...they are more “neutral” in the decision making and do what/how you tell them to do (for the most part).
 
When we did the rock n roll summer camp last summer- recording 16 to 24 tracks both in studio and from live on stage, a stand-alone CD recorder became IMPERATIVE. We could not have done without it.

So, yeah, from my experience, you gotta have one.
 
The Ghost of FM said:
Stand alone CD recorders tend to have better A/D converters in them compared to what's in the average computer. So yeah, it's worth it.

Cheers! :)
Click to expand...

Huh?

There isn't an AD in the computer. Why would there be, the signal is already digital.

I've never seen or heard a CD recorder with better than average AD's, compared to AD computer interfaces. Maybe I've never seen a good one.

If you really need to take the computer out of the chain, you could use a CD recorder. I wouldn't, but then, that's only me.
 
desmond22 said:
or am i just a gear whore??
Click to expand...

yeah, I'd say you're a gear whore, but aren't we all!:drunk:

Recording from DAT to cd recorder would be pure fetishism in my book, but have at it!

and... whats going on? are you assembling several audio tracks onto a CD "album style"? are you burning single songs to listen to the mix in your car stereo? It might be a little more convenient depending on what you're doing

- I'm all for avoiding the computer, but in this case the extra precision/control you have with a computer before it goes to disc, and the wasted cds (maybe you're better than me at getting things right the first time...:o) would for me outway any novelty in making discs from a stand alone machine.
....BUT, i'm not a CD fan (to each his own!:))- For consumer formats I prefer reels, cassettes, vinyls (i'd love a lathe cutter!) and digital files over CDs (or dvd's) - I'm just not keen on the format for personal OR professional use & for myself I'm quite happy to be rid of the cd format as much as possible - little packets of toxic trash
 I've got stacks of the things on spindles in my closet and stored away - old test mixes, copies, originals... UUUGGGHHH!!! and i'd think it was even worse if i had each one in it's own little plastic "jewel" case....

its kind of neat that they're round with a hole in the middle - i'll give them that...:D
 
Nice replies guys thanx alot.
I only have an mbox. Yes the reason for making CDs is to be able to hear in the car, to test mixes etc. Also when i record people they need something to take and no one has a DAT machine so i cant give them a DAT.
Ive already done this a few times, dumping songs into PT and mixing down, problem is , i cant help myself and end up using some software!!
Im using a macbook pro and would think the CD burner is pretty good. Some of you are saying that the quality in comparison to a CD Recorder machine is as good if not better and you have more control with sample rates etc.
Im still not sure....
when i get my music mastered the master house will get the music on DAT anyway.
Might save the $ get PT9 and a new interface...but its close to Xmas...and the rockwool need to go up in the new pad....its bloody never ending...$$$$$ im an addict i tell ye...
 
You could

1. Install a SCSI card

2. Locate an audio capable DAT drive

3. Get dat2wav

4. Extract teh wav files from the tape,

5. burn them to cd.

I've done that, because I have to do things as complicated as possible, and I have a decent DAT deck.

If your DAT recorder and your sound card have S/PDIF interfaces you *could* copy the data that way too, but you are probably using hte clock on the S/PDIF line.
 
cyrano said:
Huh?

There isn't an AD in the computer. Why would there be, the signal is already digital.

I've never seen or heard a CD recorder with better than average AD's, compared to AD computer interfaces. Maybe I've never seen a good one.

If you really need to take the computer out of the chain, you could use a CD recorder. I wouldn't, but then, that's only me.
Click to expand...

Am I missing the point here or what? If i run my analog mixer's output to the 3.5mm input on the sound card doesn't it have to be converted somehow? Not Knowing about recording with the computer I'm not sure if the sound card does the converting or the software I use.
 
I recommend a stand-alone burner. I favor those made by Pioneer, but there are other good ones. IMO among the best are the HHB CDR-850 and the Fostex CR-300, both made by Pioneer for HHB and Fostex, and both essentially the same thing but different colors with different brand names.

These are the best sounding I’ve used in the last ten years… audible difference in quality compared to any PC soundcard I’ve used. In my experience this has been the best way to go from an analog mix into the digital realm.

I do things a bit differently. I don’t mix ITB (hardly ever anyway). All my tracks, analog and digital, go through an analogue mixer to a ¼” half-track analogue deck, and from there directly to the HHB CDR-850 stand-alone burner. I can also mixdown directly to the CD burner bypassing the analog deck, but I really like to mix/master in analogue… like how it pulls everything together. Once that’s done it all gets transferred to 16/44.1 without any unnecessary digital conversions in between.

Doing it this way is a lot more like how we used to transfer directly to 16/44.1 when studios were still analog. The CD became a popular end medium long before most studios switched to digital on the production side of things. So we took the analog master and sent it to a Sony PCM-1630, which used ¾” videotape at 16/44.1 conversion. I use my stand-alone burner to do pretty much the same thing.

:)
 
choice

thanks Beck. this is how i feel about it. 'those HHB recorders arent so expensive too. This is the reason i bought the DAT recorder/ machine - to use as my master. I believe DAT is good for a master before going to CD right?
My theory is - for recording my own music- play as tight as possible, have the song nutted prior to, then mix to DAT - onto CD After. Nice and Simple. Problem i was having using PTLE was , firstly dont like the sound and secondly too many options. I just want to keep it all analog and even when i get my work mastered it is at an analog mastering house.
 
Beck said:
… audible difference in quality compared to any PC soundcard I’ve used.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about typical PC soundcards (what comes with the computer)...I agree.
But AFA outboard A/D/A DAW converters that you add to your PC...not really. I think most decent, dedicated A/D/A converters will be equal to or better than what you find on a standalone CD burner.

I also don't mix ITB.
I come out of my DAW and mix through my analog console to a 1/4" deck...but then I take the output from the deck (PB head) and it goes right back into the DAW at 24/88.2 through my outboard A/D/A converters…so I can do the final mastering in the digital domain (which is preferred unless you have some high-end analog mastering equipment).
By going back into the DAW, it lets me also choose HOW I want to do the SRC and dither down to 16/44.1...you don't get those choices when you mix directly to a standalone CD burner.
 
Last edited:
desmond22 said:
I believe DAT is good for a master before going to CD right?
Click to expand...


AFA mixing first to DAT and then over to the CD burner… most DAT technology is pretty old...so I wouldn't trust those as being the best-choice converters…but YMMV.....
 
How much do those Pioneer CD burners go for? around here they are about 500 bucks. That sort of money can by you the 8 input tascam firewire interface. How would you compare the CD burner to something like that? don't forget you then have the freedom of editing on the computer at any point.

Beck, you make it that process with the standalone Cd burner very attractive and that's what I would like to do, but it's either that CD burner or an 8 input firewire interface and there will always be projects that I just need to do digital editing and so don't see myself buying a CD burner.
 
This is simple.

Use the best A/D converter that you have. Avoid as much A/D and D/A conversion steps as you can.

If you have a good firewire/usb interface, use it just like Miroslav to push it into PT. It's digital then, so just burn it. I'd even master it to PT to avoid the old DAT A/D converter, even if it is a decent one. There's no "magic" in the DAT. Sidenote: there is some discussion going on about sampling at high bitrates and resolutions and then downsampling to 44.1kHz/16bit, which you need for burning a CD. Others prefer to sample at 44.1kHz/16bit rightaway to not have to worry about dithering and stuff. I'd suggest you just don't worry about it. Ask the mastering facility what file formats they accept, and what samplerate / resolution you should use for your mixdown.

If you don't have a good interface, you should master to the DAT recording at 44.1kHz and use its digital (optical or coax) output to get it on CD. Again: avoid unnecessary D/A/D conversion. If the mastering facility accepts DATs, ask them if they want it in 48kHz or 44.1kHz and then master away. If you master at 48kHz you will need to use the analog output from the DAT to burn you CDs on a standalone player. I don't think the samplerate conversion is very good, if it is available at all. You have the undesired D/A/D conversions then but for private listening and car audio stuff that should be ok

Cheers
Tim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top