Pro's Prefer CD Mastering at 1X...and can hear the difference.

  • Thread starter Thread starter tutton
  • Start date Start date
Uh, I don't know if I should step in here. I have heard pros say both. The camps are divided on 1x or 2x+. I have heard that 2x is best. 1x produces too many errors. There is actually less jitter in 2x or more. But no one recommends more than 4x.

I'm gone before you guys attack!
 
I use 2x as well. I burn at 2x and never burn a coaster!

Heh, it also saves money when you go to buy a burner. Nowadays, you can get a good brand burner for around $100.

[This message has been edited by beetlefan (edited 08-01-2000).]
 
The first long post was a rant, and I didn't understand what he was on about either. The second one says his studio ran tests, and decided burning at 1X is best. I've heard other opinions, based on what the finished product sounds like.

From my experience in other fields, however, whenever someone gets real hot under the collar, or defensive, or aggressive, it's usually because what they're saying is opinion, and not knowledge. When you really know something, you don't get uptight and defensive - there's no reason to.
 
Similar to arguing that "2+2=4".If you know that you are correct,why argue about it!
 
Its either magick or it's money,

unless they can tell you EXACTLY how it works, don't believe them

If they can tell you exactly how it works, still DON'T believe them
 
Stephen Paul CDR r.a.p Discussion In Order #1

"<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html>
Rappers:
<p>I heard there was some difference of opinion about my post on our CDR findings... so just to avoid any
misundersandings:
<p>I agree there are no absolutes, but most of you already know about my mystical leanings in -that- area!
'Nuff said there... However... <p>The fact is that with -any- gear, optical jitter and error with audio at 6x and
above, (and lower, depending on how critically you listen) we have simply found beyond current technology's
relatively hi-mass optical voice coil focusing and tracking hardware and PLL servos' abilities...  
In addition, it is a common misconception that reflective areas = binary ones, and dark areas = binary
zeros...  In fact whether a pit equals a zero or one depends on many other factors... it isn't as clear cut
as all that (pun intended<g>).
<p>To add to the woes, Reed-Solomon CRC code algorithms are what designers would refer to as 'leaky'...
Because your hard disk's pickup is normally designed with -extremely- lightweight and precision damped
materials, with kevlar low-mass thin-film printed circuit heads as a rule, and because imprinted magnetically
in low-level or sub-low level formatting are servo guide tracks written onto the cylinders of the platter media,
(this is how drive manufacturers currently manage to squeeze so much more data into smaller drives), and
because the error correction internally on most hard drives is at least 128 bit and very robust compared to the
CD format, you can succesfully read/write audio data much more quickly magnetically with less chance of
degradation.
<p>Also as far as my dye comments were concerned, the green dyes we have found are less stable with
temperature and sunlight problems...  etc.  I don't generally post info on anything we have not
checked out thoroughly here, and my statements were made based on the notion that if you want to be
=100% safe= under any and all circumstances regardless of your gear, my comments simply represent what
we have found to be good practice which ensures optimum results, no matter what type of other equipment
is involved,  and is followed by most good mastering facilities I know of in the LA area, and most
certainly my own.
<p>Your own experience and mileage with higher speed optical reading/writing may be different.  May
I simply point out that without meaning to sound imperious, my own ears apparently are not yet -completely-
shot, judging by most people's response to the mikes we send them, on which I am still the listening court of
final appeal, and therefore, I based my comments not only on hard data, (level drops, scope X-Y traces
showing loss of stereo data, echo, etc.), but also quite subjectively on my own most unworthy and humble
ears.  Hey, if 8x works for you, go for it!  Tinfoil is still pretty good too I hear...<g>  (At
least in M-50 and KM-53 diaphragms!)
<p>SP
<br>--
<br>Links:
<br><a href="http://www.mp3.com/StephenPaul">The Music Site</a> <br><a
href="http://stations.mp3s.com/stations/34/stephen_pauls_fave_artists.html">The Station</a>
<br><a href="http://www.spaudio.com">SPAudio/Built On Dreams</a> <p> "If you blaze a trail and
nobody follows it- <br>  You're not a Pioneer, you're an Eccentric!" <br>   -SP
<br> </html>"
 
Stephen Paul CDR r.a.p Discussion In Order #2

"spaul@primenet.com wrote:
>In addition, it is a common misconception that reflective areas = binary
>ones, and dark areas = binary zeros...  In fact whether a pit equals
>a zero or one depends on many other factors... it isn't as clear cut as
>all that (pun intended<g>).

Correct. What matters are the zero crossings, and the length of each pit or land sequence represents a
symbol in eight-to-fourteen modulation. Errors are possible when the timing is poor and the lengths of each
pit sequence is too close to the length of a similar symbol.

>To add to the woes, Reed-Solomon CRC code algorithms are what designers
>would refer to as 'leaky'...

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Would you care to explain further in detail what's wrong with
R-SCIRC?

[snip]
> you
>can succesfully read/write audio data much more quickly magnetically with
>less chance of degradation.

No, this not exactly the case.

The biggest problem with CD is that the track is a continuous spiral. On HD and other media, the disk is
divided into tracks and sectors.

HD's also miss servo and tracks all the time. Hard disks are NOT guaranteed to return you data in any
amount of time. It may take a significant amount of time to return data from a disk, if conditions are such that
it has difficulty servo-locking on a particular track, or if error correction takes multiple attempts to read the
data. This can and does happen, and the track/sector formatting makes it possible for a drive to make
several attempts to read media, or even remap a bad area on the fly to guarantee data integrity.

However, the spiral format guarantees timely delivery of data, but not data integrity. No CD audio player will
make multiple attempts at reading the same data. If the read fails, only the error correction mechanism can
save the read.

HD also have the advantage of operating under controlled conditions, which lessens the chance of lost data,
but does not eliminate the possibility. Since CD's are exposed to handling, the playback system has to have
significant error handling capability to deal with scratches or soiling of the disk surface.

So actually, the error handling is more robust for optical systems.

Data CD roms employ another level of error correction to ensure data integrity for computer use. It is
acceptable for a consumer music playback system to occasionally play interpolated data (meaning an
uncorrectable playback error) but this would of course be fatal in computer usage. Millions of people use
CDRoms every day without problems, so we know that the error correction is working. (you'll find more errors
are generated with CD roms by the interface, buggy host drivers and flaky drive firmware than by the media).

While problems do crop up with CDR - ROM's from time to time, by no means is it widespread. Billions of
data CDR's have been made and by and large, they work without error.

In actual measurement of uncorrectable errors on audio CD players, such events are actually unusual. Most
any CD player will recover data from the disk at nearly 100% accuracy.

As far as CDR for pre-mastering, do what works best. There is no way to be certain what you doing withough
having the media extensively tested after burning. If you can burn the disk and the replication facility recover
the data with perfect accuracy, then there are no problems with what you doing, regardless of media color,
burning speed, phase of the moon or anything else.




--
Dr. Nuketopia
Spam filtering is off. AO-Hell catches most of it now."
 
Stephen Paul CDR r.a.p Discussion In Order #3

"In article <20000605223150.15893.00003952@ng-md1.aol.com>,
larrysb@aol.com (nuke) wrote:
> spaul@primenet.com wrote:
> >In addition, it is a common misconception that reflective areas = binary
> >ones, and dark areas = binary zeros...  In fact whether a pit equals
> >a zero or one depends on many other factors... it isn't as clear cut as
> >all that (pun intended<g>).
>
> Correct. What matters are the zero crossings, and the length of each pit or
> land sequence represents a symbol in eight-to-fourteen modulation. Errors are
> possible when the timing is poor and the lengths of each pit sequence is too
> close to the length of a similar symbol.

Thank God I was right about SOMETHING...

>
> >To add to the woes, Reed-Solomon CRC code algorithms are what designers
> >would refer to as 'leaky'...
>
> I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Would you care to explain further
> in detail what's wrong with R-SCIRC?

Not right now, but I have already. Disagree all you want... I have no idea who you are or where you get your
opinions, but you're welcome to 'em. I believe already explained that there are problems involving jitter, and
other elements which don't =neccessarily= result in error correction coming into play...

WHEN ARE YOU GUYS THROWING FIRE AT ME ON THIS THREAD WITHOUT READ ING =EVERYTHING I
SAID???= AND STOP TAKING THINGS OUT OF CONTEXT WITHOUT MY QUALIFYING STATEMENTS
INCLUDED IN YOUR "BRAIN" OR QUOTES? AND I PARAPHRASE MYSELF "There are no absolutes, what
works best works best, and I never told anyone that I'm God and not to see what works best for them..."
There are -many- things that the ear can hear that no measuring in =either= the Digital OR Analog domains
may currently resolve into absolutes...

That's my experience talking, after being a recordist for over 40 years, an artist 35 years, and after designing,
installing and/or building and chief engineering some of the biggest best equipped facilities in the world, not
to mention having built the mikes used on probably 80% of the most whatever records out there, often with
NO credit from the artists or recordists... I feel like some of you guys are using myself and my reputation for a
way to make yourselves look hot... great you're all blazing, I am an ignorant ass who's opinions are simply
that, and I have stated this many times.

Another lovely post to me about this stated at the top, "Sorry wrong." With all I know and have experienced in
41 years of playing with recording toys, I would still NEVER say someone was simply and absolutlely
-wrong-. There are facts, but there are also places where even facts =break= =down=... check out another
pea-brain named Heisenberg who delineated this for us all many years ago...

I am really sick of this bickering and cat post clawing... Reed-Solomon CRC code is NOT the panacea for all
ills of digital storage and recovery... There are many papers on the subject but find them yourselves, and
please stop making out that I have done anything but given emphasis to good practice guidelines which will
ordinarily result, (at least IN MY CRUMMY OPINION) in better sounding records... on Plextors or any other
damned thing? Why not -listen- to the results of my ignorance before you 'gurus' gun for me, like I'm Wyatt
Earp and you want to maje a rep for yourselves by shooting me down... Sometimes I really HATE this place,
and this bull**** is =why=.

>
> [snip]
> > you
> >can succesfully read/write audio data much more quickly magnetically with
> >less chance of degradation.
>
> No, this not exactly the case.

Of =course= it isn't EXACTLY the case. Thank you... Kindly notice the qualifiers CAN, and LESS CHANCE...
D'you think those are there because I think I have the only answer or opinion? D'you think I'm not CAREFUL
about my statements because I'm a scientist, and know that it's all on the edge? No. I'm careful, because an
ignorant self-educated -jerk- like myself HAS to be careful amongst all you learned High Priests out here... It's
like walking into a den of cobras... and to quote Indiana Jones, "Snakes... I HATE snakes...."

> The biggest problem with CD is that the track is a continuous spiral. On HD and
> other media, the disk is divided into tracks and sectors.

They also are not at constant speed... they have to spin faster on inner portions of the spiral to keep the read
rate even. However could you neglect this in your most learned, humbling distertation???

> HD's also miss servo and tracks all the time. Hard disks are NOT guaranteed to
> return you data in any amount of time. It may take a significant amount of
> time to return data from a disk, if conditions are such that it has difficulty
> servo-locking on a particular track, or if error correction takes multiple
> attempts to read the data. This can and does happen, and the track/sector
> formatting makes it possible for a drive to make several attempts to read
> media, or even remap a bad area on the fly to guarantee data integrity.

Hence a part of my comments that THE CHANCE OF more successful recovery exists on HDs at higher
speeds...

> However, the spiral format guarantees timely delivery of data, but not data
> integrity. No CD audio player will make multiple attempts at reading the same
> data. If the read fails, only the error correction mechanism can save the read.

Really? Ever heard of RAM buffers? Where all this action still takes place? Never heard a skipping CD trying
to re-read data before unsuccessfully moving on? Complete failure of even error concealment schemes?
You actually buy into the baloney that RS CRC is superman? It catcjes all the ear could ever hear? It
ALWAYS gets the anagram unscrambled properly? The checsum block itself is ALWAYS the RIGHT
NUMBER? And that's ALL that matters in Audio Reproduction?? God I'm dumb.

> HD also have the advantage of operating under controlled conditions, which
> lessens the chance of lost data, but does not eliminate the possibility. Since
> CD's are exposed to handling, the playback system has to have significant error
> handling capability to deal with scratches or soiling of the disk surface.
> So actually, the error handling is more robust for optical systems.

Is that a fact? My datasheets tell me differently. But they could be out of date by now, or I could be wrong, but
at the speeds these HDs operate at the sheer size of the CRC blocks and hardware internal ECC systems
go far beyond what is in the normal CD player... but I could be wrong about that too. No. In fact I INSIST I'm
wrong... Dumber and dumber... hIgh noon boys and girls... and none but me and these two learned
gentleman of uncivilized refutation on the dusty street between me and certain Death... "....dah dah dah dah
dah oh my darlin'... dum chicka chicka chicka chicka chicka chicka chick... I guess Gary Cooper musta felt
like this.

> Data CD roms employ another level of error correction to ensure data integrity
> for computer use. It is acceptable for a consumer music playback system to
> occasionally play interpolated data (meaning an uncorrectable playback error)
> but this would of course be fatal in computer usage. Millions of people use
> CDRoms every day without problems, so we know that the error correction is
> working. (you'll find more errors are generated with CD roms by the interface,
> buggy host drivers and flaky drive firmware than by the media).

It's ACCEPTABLE!! DAMN MY EYES... WHY DIDN'T I SEE THAT?? So isn't it strange then that 8x Plextor cut
and SCSI bus read CDs though -perfectly- capable of restoring software to operational condition, still exhibit
MEASURED audio level drops of up to 3dB in playback (through a D-D interface,) on the SAME converter box
used to encode them externally? Not to mention how BAD they SOUND... But, as Ruby Rod in the 5th
Element pointed out about the perfect replica of the Old Operahouse..."But who CARES??" So how does this
compute? Have you tried and LISTENED to the damned things? Or is this all theory. I'm talking about
SOUND, not software. I have NO detailed complete total understanding (yet) of why this is, only hypotheses
and theories, but they SOUND BAD, and LOSE LEVEL... Of course, that's my unlearned, stupid, jackassed
and completely worthless opinion...

Which is really all I obviously care about, not necessarily what some spec sheet says it SHOULD do or why...
Or for that matter WHERE the problem really lies... All I can say is 8x Software YES, 8x audio, NO.
==IMHWO== This is why I qualify my statements, and this is why my advice to those asking was based on
what I have heard, and experienced. But we forget, I have no experience, no ears, and my recordings bear
complete evidence of this... Plus I obviously haven't any idea what I'm talking about, and to quote the other
gentleman's post "I wish you'd be more careful about your information before you go spreading it around
publicly..." or something to that effect... Screw it. Catch me spreading -anything- around here, and remind me
to SHUT UP...

I get it now...

NOTICE: Those of you who have kept my posts or whatever... TOSS 'EM they are worthless, as I now realize...
Contributions?? Hah. I'm addled. An abject idiot... I finally understand that. What a dope. To all those I have
hoodwinked or hypnotized into thinking my mikes are good, and my recordings sound good because I
practice what I have preached-- I APOLOGIZE... Snap. SNap, SNAP!! I ORDER you to wake up!

Announcement: I will close the shop tomorrow, as I realize the disservice I have done to audio... It was well
intentioned, believe me, but I've obviously failed... I know that now. There is no defense... I'm a charlatan, a
fraud... certainly not worthy of your either your repect or time to even ackowledge my stupidity by correcting
me... I have played God, and Zeus and Jupiter have struck me down... After that, I will shut my mp3 site down
so that none need be exposed to the grossness at my pitiful attempts at recording, and all who ordered
hand-made real-time copies of CDs, consider the orders cancelled as of now... you will obviously be better
off with Britney Spears heavily mass-produced, truly error free audiophile CDs.

I had no right to inflict myself on you, nor my poor recording or mastering skills.

I don't even deserve a civilized extension or open-minded reply to my remarks, I'm simply, utterly WRONG!
PLEASE get that into all of your heads... Before I unfortunately and accidentally saw these posts I did not
realize the extent of my sins... Listen to these guys, okay? They will be your lighthouses... The house of Paul
is no more. I'm going to eat my last meal...

> While problems do crop up with CDR - ROM's from time to time, by no means is it
> widespread. Billions of data CDR's have been made and by and large, they work
> without error.

DEAD MAN WALKING... Without error!!!... BILLIONS WITHOUT ERROR!! I"M the only thing in error here,
obviously... I can't stand up against BILLIONS, let alone a couple of flamers like these... what are you guys
waiting for?? Come on, get out the Lethal Injection Machine, and LET'S GO! I'm so tired of this crap. Kill me
off and set youselves free BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!! Thank God for Deja News, or I might have gone on
misleading all you poor lost souls who trusted me... I'M SORRY, GOD, I"M SORRY!!! I thought I was
-helping-... I see now...

I hope the governor DOESN'T CALL... or the Pope for that matter... put me out of my misery, will ya? Until today
I just didn't realize how many sheep I've mislead... I'm the Jim Jones of the Audio World...

> In actual measurement of uncorrectable errors on audio CD players, such events
> are actually unusual. Most any CD player will recover data from the disk at
> nearly 100% accuracy.

ACTUAL MEASUREMENT BOYS AND GIRLS!! ACTUAL MEASUREMENT... THESE EVENTS ARE UNUSUAL...
AND THER'RE =BILLIONS= OF THEM I THOUGHT WERE *BAD* BUT ARE PERFECTLY ERROR FREE!!! I
HAVE NEVER KNOWN WHAT TRUTH WAS... my life has been a lie, and to think I used to have the first Clover
Systems funky little dip**** attempt at a green console in my living room in 1971... It was a Piece of the True
Cross... I know that now... <sob>... 100% ACCURACY!! And I thought they sounded like Bantha poodoo! Let's
go with the straps, boys, put me on the table.... I only have something I'd like to say to the relatives before you
push the button...

> As far as CDR for pre-mastering, do what works best. There is no way to be
> certain what you doing withough having the media extensively tested after
> burning. If you can burn the disk and the replication facility recover the
> data with perfect accuracy, then there are no problems with what you doing,
> regardless of media color, burning speed, phase of the moon or anything else.

NO WAY TO BE CERTAIN!! I KNOW THIS NOW... FORGIVE ME, RAPPERS, I THOUGHT MY EARS WERE
GOOD ENOUGH TO TELL WHEN IT WAS GOOD... I DIDN'T MEAN TO KILL YOUR AUDIO, I DIDN'T MEAN IT....
(hanging my head as much as the table straps will permit) "Go on, Warden, that's all I have to say now... I
know it won't bring back all the disks my thoughtless advice murdered, but I hope you.. will....forgive.......
me......" <slump>.

> --
> Dr. Nuketopia
> Spam filtering is off. AO-Hell catches most of it now.

<Voice from Heaven> "And this ba***rd wouldn't even sign his name...."

SP"
 
This Software Is Buggin'-Out

It won't let me edit one of my message on the first page of this thread and on the message I want to edit, it says I'm a guest. HA!!!
 
Question,

The guy says (at the first link, in the first post) that the sound changes EVEN WHEN YOU COPY THE FILES TO DIFFERENT HARDDRIVES. If i am correct the sound would only change if the BITS of the file change. This is easy to test. If the bits in the files would really change then we wouldnt be able to use any computer software since a simple copy operation would change the executable object code resulting in system crashes.

I think he is talking crap, its like saying that the same JPG image looks different if loaded by my hard drive or by my cdr.
 
Wassup R.E.! Can you breakdown basically what Mr Paul is trying to say? It's a little over my head! Thx.

[Edited by MISTERQCUE on 08-04-2000 at 06:55]
 
Sometimes I wish everything was analog again. Wouldn't have to worry about all this crap.
 
back in the old days it did matter

the only reason 1x v. 2x mattered is because of the speed of the CPU performing the burn and the cache in the CD-writer. A CD burn is sequential. if the CPU can't dish out the data fast enough, or the CD-writer can't handle the data it is given fast enought, you end up with a coaster/frisbee.

with 1ghz CPU's and 4x CD-writer's with 2-4mb cache the worry of burning coaster is minimal.

except of course if you are using RedRoaster and trying to perform a 'burn-on-the-fly' with effects using a 450mhz amd k6-3 to a ricoh mp6201 (2x) CD-writer...but i digress.

izzy
 
Me Too!!!

Guys, it's over my head too... I was hoping someone could help explain it to me... Also, PART of my point of posting ALL that was for the person who said something to the extent of "Don't trust anyone who can't explain it.". Well, I think he explained it... So can you understand it? I can't!!!

Actually, if ANYONE was really interested enough, they could just call and talk to Stephen Paul himself. In fact, next time I talk to him on the phone, I'll probably just ask him to explain even more.

I can tell you ALL that Stephen Paul is ANYWHERE but talking out his ass... Go ahead and ask ANY pro studio engineer in the WORLD and ask 'em if THEY think stephen Paul is talking out his ass...

I can also tell you what I'll be doing for now on...

I can't wait until the Stephen Paul Audio website is completely up...! I think we're ALL going to learn OH SO MUCH in all sorts of areas of recording!
 
Maybe It's Magic...

But it's most definitely not money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top