Copying CD's

Kevin

The rest of the system is a (temporary) 32.5, supercap, passive 135s, an 02 and sbls. The rest of the rig is on a mana 6-tier, the sbls on mana platforms.

The trouble is this. When I want to record I remove the CDS from the Phase 3 and put my 765 on the Phase 3 instead. The 765 is allowed to warm up, to which end, discs are played on both the play and the record side.

Before recording, the source and copy discs are washed, dried, given the bedini ultra-clarifier treatment and finally 1 statmat per disc before recording. So it is a meticulous process, though not fanatical, if you know what I mean. And recordings are done only when the least number of appliances in the house and (presumably) neighbourhood are turned on, my separate spur notwithstanding.

I'd expect damn good recordings - which is to say I don't get them.

I experienced a lack of interest when playing back a copy, which I put down to poor timing qualities of the recorded disc, plus some rawness.

So essentially, I am just wondering if the problem is in the recording side - could it be the recording side is not run-in enough? did you have initially the same results? I've recorded maybe 4 hours worth of music, tops. The lack of interest I experience also occurs when I monitor the playback via headphones - the Sennheiser HD600 is pretty useful.

Thanks in advance,

Vik

I find that sometimes there is a adifference in volume between copy and source Cd. I find it amazing because all the data in CD is a digital data and this includes the "instructions" about
the level of volume. If there is a different in volume there must be a different in other factors - but how? As a programmer I know that if
you copy a digital data from one media to another - as for the didgital matters the data is the same - but how can it differ when we use it
with our Cd players.

Most of my friends who have a standart stereo systems are claiming at me that there is no differences at all. But we with our better equipment feel differences.

Maybe it is because of the different in depth of the copied data on cd comapres with depth of data
on the original - if it is how can it be ?

If there is a difference, I'm sure all the music
companies at the world should shout it loud and prove that copied discs are inferior to the
original - so if there is a different how comes they are sitting silently ?

Maybe something wrong with our ears ?

Arie

the copies aren't a patch on the originals.

Used with a CDX they reduce the performance of the player to much less than a 10 year old Arcam two-box.

cheers, Martin

Stefano.

PS
I absolutely agree on the (too high) cost of CDs all over the world:
CD (box included): say 0.5 UKP?
Copying process (large scale production): say 0.3 UKP?
Cover, lyrics, labels: say 0.8 UKP?
I'd like to know how the remaining 10 (approximately) are shared among artists, production companies and so on.

PPS
It is obvious that a lower price would decrease illegal copies and increase turnovers.

1) What you use - some machines are better than others, and the best I have found is using a PC and some decent copying software.

2) It also depends on the quality of the blanks used. Some are terrible.

3) CDR and CDRW provide different results with different kit.

4) Yeah - sometimes they just don't work - especially in Naim kit. Don't try using > the standard red book length (c75 mins?) 'cos it probably won't play.

5) It is never quite as good as the original - even with the good PC option. Wierd - not sure why. Sounds silly with digital - maybe something to do with error checking??

6) Unless you make copies for your own use ... it is illegal just about everywhere. Careful.

I used to use a friends PC set up to do the occasional compilation disc to help with things like auditioning - but eventually stopped because of the quality issues. However - I will now get me own copying set up, because :-

1) My firend has moved to the other side of the world and taken his PC with him.

2) I've just ordered a car with BOSE Hi-fi and 6 cd multichanger. So I can do stuff for the car without worring about the copy quality 'cos the engine noise will be x10 worse, AND keep the original safe.

Allways, allways try to copy realtime. Double speed will usually work but gives inferior results.
Recordings made at quad or highet speed often refuse to play on my Cyrus or Naim player.

Even realtime copies sound a little flat & 'dirty' compared to the original - but still enjoyable.

Use good quality branded discs too like TDK, Kodak, or Maxell.

Rob.

I have taken nothing like the care you have with recordings and I have still been very pleased with the results. The CDR I bought was second hand and so did not appear to need any run-in period.

Kevin

But as I see most of us feel that the copied one is not like the original and I realy want to understand how it comes - it is a wonder for me.

Comapring on a computer the copied one is the same as the original.

Arie

quote:

---

But as I see most of us feel that the copied one is not like the original and I realy want to understand how it comes - it is a wonder for me. Comapring on a computer the copied one is the same as the original.

---

Arie.

As a pure reading of data, the copy is identical, but when it comes to recreating music, the timing of the 1s and 0s is important and this is not perfect in the copy.

BTW--what are you doing up so bloody early??!! I know I've been bugging people about silly nicknames, but you my friend have earned the right to use "Milkman."

Vuk.

I'd thought to use green ink on the edges too. While it would've helped recordings it would've sounded dead on the Naims.

This tweak had served me well from the Meridien MCD (remember that?) onwards till I bought my first Naim CDP. After which I spent many annoying evenings removing it all.

I can't remember if it was this process that affirmed in me that EVERYBODY ELSE was Flat Earth, and Naim was Round AND green.

Best
Vik

About the cows, I don't remember when I saw one... I live in Haifa which is a city (the third in number of population in Israel and the first in industrial areas).
In Israel - as the sea shore goes from North to South, Haifa lies on a mountain (Carmel mounatain but we have no connection with Clint Estwood) that goes from East to West and reaches the sea. The mountain is 1500 feet high - and there is a wonderful view here - many people and tourists claim this is one of the most beatiful cities in the world.

I have milk from the supermarket nearby my home...

Tomorrow we have a holiday here ROSH HASHANA which
means "Year's head" and this is the beginig of our new year - we celebrate this holiday but we live our life according to the Georgian calander.

That's something about life here - I hope it is not boring.

Arie

[This message was edited by Arie_Gur on THURSDAY 28 September 2000 at 17:08.]

The best method is is via a PC. Don't use the cheapo blanks. Traxdata and TDK are OK. Don't buy the ones marked 'audio' they include a rake off to the phono industry but don't sound any better. Use a good quality cd -writer - the best is Plextor although Sony are close. Use good CD mastering software like WinOnCD or Nero- I don't like the results from Adaptec. Contrary to popular belief recording in real time is worse, not better. This is because modern writers will over-cook the pits at such a low speed. Try 2 or even 4 speed. Vuk is again expressing views about something which he clearly has little knowledge. I find that SOME copies sound even better than the original, possibly because the PC extracts the digital code and lays it down on a nice pristine surface that the CD player can read with less error correction. The bottom line is that if you follow the above, most of your copies will be just as good as the originals, even on 'superior' systems. (I've tried them on a Linn Karik, Ikemi & Genki, and my friend's Meridian)

Thanks,
Arie

Regards P.

Vuk

quote:

---

many people and tourists claim this is one of the most beatiful cities in the world.

---

Hmmmm, errrrrr, Arie ? Are we talking about the same Haifa, the city that never wakes up and has an ugly port in the front and refineries at the back ???
It may be prettier than Tel-Aviv, but that's not saying much...

quote:

---

Pierre O'Lounaire?

---

Can it be Pierre is actually Pierre Cardin but since his tie empire is going down he is only using his first name ?

Or maybe Pierre Channel the 5th ?

Arie

quote:

---

Like many Israelies who don't know Haifa and speak
only about the port and refieneries, I sugest next
time when you are here let me show you the city
from the Carmel (I will not ask you to sweem at the port.....)

---

Arie, you're too damn serious. I know a bit about Haifa and visit it from time to time (Technion, the Carmel, Haifa university, and I had friends in Neve Shaanan) and although I don't think it's one of the most beautiful cities in the world I think it is nice and much prefer its looks to probably any other city in Israel, and damn, you have the only decent Naim dealer here.

SHANA TOVA,

Omer

I've been trying to find out why for a number of years now - I've tried different CD writers, software and discs.

I am veering strongly towards the opinion that the discs and/or the physics of the writing process is the primary source of the differences.

The blank CDR disc has a track manufactured onto the disc, that is used to guide the laser, and more importantly I believe, to provide timing information.

There is a sinusoidal 'wobble' on this track, at a frequency of 22.05kHz (1/2 of the CD sample rate), that is used to control the disc's rotational velocity. I assume it is used to control a PLL to keep the disc spinning at the correct speed. Errors in this track, and poor PLL performance would impact sound quality dramatically.

Additionally, the time taken for the recording dye to change state when being written to by the laser could also introduce timing jitter.

My belief is the above would produce the type of sound I'm hearing from the copied CD's, i.e. poor rythm and timing, missing low-level detail and a generally harsh unpleasant sound. This is exactly the effect I get if I introduce more jitter into the master clock in my CD player.

I have noticed that some manufacturers (e.g. Philips) are advertising some CDR discs as 'low jitter' I will try some and see if there are any differences.

Andy.

Andrew L. Weekes
alweekes@audiophile.com

aaa101 said:
>> I find that SOME copies sound even better than the original, possibly because the PC extracts the digital code and lays it down on a nice pristine surface that the CD player can read with less error correction <<

Although in most cases copies sound at best marginally worse I've heard other people claim improvements as well. There are theories that copying provides some kind of de-jittering effect, or that a new copy allows the player to read the CD more realiably and the consequent reduction in movement of the laser reduces noise from the servos and so reduces noise in the analogue stage of the CD player. However noise correction is definitely not a factor as 99% of the time error correction has no effect on sound quality.

Matthew

The best ones tend to keep the A to D converters away from the PC - i.e have a break out box which connects to the PC via a card.

There is lots of information on digitizing sound on the Sound On Sound Website(which is a magazine for digital musicans. They also have lots of reviews etc.

If you've got a fairly new PC with a USB port then the EGO-Sys Waveterminal U2A features high quality 24bit DACs and is good value at approx $270 USD. Details are on thier web site (Note that if it asks you to install a Korean language pack say no as the site is in English).

Otherwise the pro market leader for many years is the Digital Audio CardDeluxe at approx $500 USD.

Sorry I don't have UK prices although you can either buy over the WEB or a trip to Tottenham Court Rd a a bit a haggling should result in a decent UK price.

Matthew