Burning CD's at different speeds

It's all about the equipment

Moderators: Mr Awesomer, JesseMiner, CafeSavoy

Message
Author
User avatar
mark0tz
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 3:54 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Burning CD's at different speeds

#1 Post by mark0tz » Tue May 13, 2003 10:45 am

Okay, has anyone found different results burning at different speeds? One of the CD players that I use takes a lot of time seeking for the track for a bunch of CD's that I've burnt recently -- compared to the originals.

I've been burning them at 24x, and I'm wondering if anyone else has experienced complications from burning CD's at higher speeds or if it's just a product of a bad CD-burner (or reader). I know I need to test the CD's out on some other CD-players in order to get a better sense of which one it is, but do you intentionally burn audio at lower speeds for the benefit of your CD-player? Have you noticed different results at different speeds?
Mike Marcotte

User avatar
GemZombie
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:46 pm
Location: Alpharetta, GA (Formerly SLO, CA)
Contact:

#2 Post by GemZombie » Tue May 13, 2003 11:26 am

It can happen that way actually.

Chances are your CD player doesn't deal as well with CD-R media in general, and especially 24x (which is a bit different).

I don't know if burning at a slower speed will actually help, but it feasibly is possible.

"Burn proof" ability is in most CD burners now, which is the ability to recover from buffer underruns... I'm unsure if it's used for while doing track at once for audio CD's... but if it were, that would create a problem if you actually experienced an underrun... because it would by default make seeking change during play back. not a big deal for data, but for audio CD players that don't buffer ahead (ie most), that would create a skip.

Toon Town Dave
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:52 pm
Location: Saskatoon, Canada

#3 Post by Toon Town Dave » Wed May 14, 2003 3:29 am

Burning slower is a first thing to try. I've had to deal with some problematic DVD players that were hit or miss if they could read CD-R media. Burn speed did not seem to make a difference.

If it's just the one player having trouble, then I'd suspect it may be a little more sensitive to CD-R media. Make sure the player is clean (the laser), I found that was the precursor to skipping on a poorly maintained Dennon deck.

The other thing to try would be a different media. There are only a few companies that actually make CD-R media and many who sell it under their own brand. Some manufacturers are better than others. Most of the big names' media is OEMed by someone else. You can download a little utility called CDRIdentifier that can read the blank media and determine the manufacturer. If it can't, the media is probably garbage. I don't have the link bookmarked but Google should find it.

If different media still doesn't work, then I'd suspect the AGC (Automatic Gain Control) in the deck is either poorly designed or the deck is failing.

User avatar
Big Mama Rockstar
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:36 pm
Location: Boise, ID
Contact:

#4 Post by Big Mama Rockstar » Wed May 14, 2003 10:52 am

I never have a problem with memorex ( not any coasters yet) but it's those cheapy weird name brands that I get the most problems with in conjunction with other errors.

i have a 2 year old desktop so my burner is like stone age compared to others i can ONLY write up to 8x. but I don't care. it takes 10 minutes to burn a cd big deal I exit all programs burn the cd and go do something productive. I buy the memorex when they are on sale< kmart goingout of business>

I have Imation disks that were way cheap on sale so I couldn't pass it up. despite the coaster ratio ( i guess i don't value my time enough to care about having to try again) Office max has them cheap usually with out the whole rebate BS. i got two packs of 50 with a coupon for 10$ it was buy one get one free. otherwise it's the 30pk mem for me and I don't have much problem
"Mush damn you MUSH!" " oh no it's the Balboa NAZI!"

User avatar
mark0tz
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 3:54 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

#5 Post by mark0tz » Wed May 14, 2003 2:37 pm

ya, I use TDK, which is a decent brand. I used to use KODAK gold, but they're too expensive and hard-to-get (ebay), and I didn't think they were worth the extra money. So, I don't really think it's the media.

What about ... sometimes have you noticed some players not being happy about the last track or two on a pretty full CD? That might have something to do with how it was burnt (and perhaps the burner's problem with the speed)? Or is it probably the CD-player (or some combination of both) just not happy at reading the last couple of tracks on a burnt CD?
Mike Marcotte

User avatar
GemZombie
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:46 pm
Location: Alpharetta, GA (Formerly SLO, CA)
Contact:

#6 Post by GemZombie » Wed May 14, 2003 2:59 pm

mark0tz wrote:ya, I use TDK, which is a decent brand. I used to use KODAK gold, but they're too expensive and hard-to-get (ebay), and I didn't think they were worth the extra money. So, I don't really think it's the media.

What about ... sometimes have you noticed some players not being happy about the last track or two on a pretty full CD? That might have something to do with how it was burnt (and perhaps the burner's problem with the speed)? Or is it probably the CD-player (or some combination of both) just not happy at reading the last couple of tracks on a burnt CD?
There at least 2 lengths of CD-R's, and some might be too long for older players to handle. Here in my office i have 80Min CD-R, and 74 minute CD-R... and I think there's a third shorter size. Make sure your player can read all of those.

KevinSchaper
Posts: 277
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 4:29 pm
Location: Eugene, OR

#7 Post by KevinSchaper » Thu May 15, 2003 2:09 pm

mark0tz wrote: What about ... sometimes have you noticed some players not being happy about the last track or two on a pretty full CD? That might have something to do with how it was burnt (and perhaps the burner's problem with the speed)? Or is it probably the CD-player (or some combination of both) just not happy at reading the last couple of tracks on a burnt CD?
Is that maybe a table of contents thing?

The older tascam rack mount cd players that my college station used to have could play the higher numbered tracks, but they wouldn't display time remaining.. seems like it might be a related thing.

User avatar
Lawrence
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 2:08 pm
Location: Austin, Texas
Contact:

Re: Burning CD's at different speeds

#8 Post by Lawrence » Fri May 16, 2003 3:24 pm

mark0tz wrote:Okay, has anyone found different results burning at different speeds? One of the CD players that I use takes a lot of time seeking for the track for a bunch of CD's that I've burnt recently -- compared to the originals.
* * * *
do you intentionally burn audio at lower speeds for the benefit of your CD-player? Have you noticed different results at different speeds?
Yes and No. In my experience, given a clean, error-free/scratch-free source disk, a clean, scratch-free destination disk, a fast enough source drive (hard drive or CD-ROM drive) and fast enough processor to handle the speed, there should not be any difference between a disk burned at 48x and a disk burned at 1x.

However, errors can occur if the processor/drives are not fast enough or if the source is scratched or otherwise not error-free. Also, an error can occur if the destination disk is obscured such that the laser does not burn the correct image when it is whizzing quickly, but would be able to penetrate the imperfection if the speed was slower. In those cases, speed does affect reliability in both preventing buffer underrun and in preventing other errors (read errors and burn errors) that are not the result of buffer underrun. In other words, just because a burn is successful (no buffer underrun) does not mean that there are not any errors in the copy. You need to use a confirmation program to compare the copy with the source to ensure no errors. Sometimes the burning software fills in the "gaps" in information but sometimes it says "fuck it, I don't have time to fix EVERYTHING," and just leaves those digital "gaps" in.

I have had some CD-ROM drives as source drives that could not reliably extract audio files faster than 4x. Even though it COULD burn at 8x, it would result in shoddy copies, so I never recorded from that drive over 4x. It also depends on whether the source and burning drives are on the same (thingy-connection: bus?). My CD-ROM drive is fast enough to extract music at 16x, and my processor and burner can burn at 16x if the hard drive is the source, but my computer cannot burn faster than 8x if the other CD-ROM drive is the source because it is on the same IDEE thingy.

Many CD players are fickle with CD-Rs such that an error-free CD-R will read fine, whereas just a few minor errors will throw the CD-player off that would not throw off a better CD-player.
Lawrence Page
Austin Lindy Hop
http://www.AustinLindy.com

User avatar
Matthew
Posts: 421
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 7:31 am
Location: St. Petersburg, Florida

#9 Post by Matthew » Fri Dec 05, 2003 8:43 am

I asked about this at CompUSA once, and two clerks (who seemed to know what they were talking about) agreed that many dedicated CD-players had trouble with music burned above 4x, and occasionally even with 4x. I burn at 4x, and only rarely have trouble (usually with older equipment).

User avatar
Lawrence
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 2:08 pm
Location: Austin, Texas
Contact:

#10 Post by Lawrence » Fri Dec 05, 2003 12:01 pm

Matthew wrote:I asked about this at CompUSA once, and two clerks (who seemed to know what they were talking about) agreed that many dedicated CD-players had trouble with music burned above 4x, and occasionally even with 4x. I burn at 4x, and only rarely have trouble (usually with older equipment).
Although there are probably exceptions, don't trust anything that anyone says at Comp USA. They tend to have more experience sounding like they know what they are talking about than they do actually knowing what they are talking about. Otherwise, they wouldn't be working at Comp USA.

The CDs I have burned at 48x work just as well as the CDs I have burned at 4x. So long as you don't have the interference problems I mentioned above, there is no reason why recording speed should be a factor in how well the CD-R plays back. Slower speeds merely allow for the computer to deal with quirks/errors/misreads that arise from dirty or scratched disks or lenses.
Lawrence Page
Austin Lindy Hop
http://www.AustinLindy.com

Lindy Bomb
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 6:27 pm
Location: Dirty D

#11 Post by Lindy Bomb » Fri Dec 05, 2003 12:05 pm

My burner is old and ghetto, only burns up to 8x. I notice a quality difference between burning cds at 4x and 8x. I don't burn cds at 8x anymore because they have these weird little pops, those are eliminated if I burn at slower speeds. Might not be the same for everyone else, but that's just what I've experienced.

User avatar
Lawrence
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 2:08 pm
Location: Austin, Texas
Contact:

#12 Post by Lawrence » Sun Dec 07, 2003 12:48 am

Lindy Bomb wrote:My burner is old and ghetto, only burns up to 8x. I notice a quality difference between burning cds at 4x and 8x. I don't burn cds at 8x anymore because they have these weird little pops, those are eliminated if I burn at slower speeds. Might not be the same for everyone else, but that's just what I've experienced.
Absolutely. I had two source drives and a CD-R on my first set-up. One source CD drive could provide information just fine at 8x, whereas the other could only be the source drive reliably at 4x. If your computer is old enough, your processor probably is too tasked recording at 8x "on the fly," as well (CD to CD directly, not off the hard drive). What's happening is that your processor, drives, or software does not have enough time to process all the information and fix the errors quickly enough, so the CD-R ends up burning the errors on the CD-R. Slowing it down gives the system more time to figure out or reconcile the errors and burn accurately.

However, that has to do with the successfulness of the burn, not whether it is "more readable" when burned slower. So long as the system is fast enough and there are no read or writing errors (e.g., no scratches on the source or destination discs), a disk burned at 48x should be just as "readable" as a disc burned at 1x.
Lawrence Page
Austin Lindy Hop
http://www.AustinLindy.com

User avatar
GemZombie
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:46 pm
Location: Alpharetta, GA (Formerly SLO, CA)
Contact:

#13 Post by GemZombie » Wed Dec 10, 2003 11:18 am

Lawrence wrote:
Matthew wrote:I asked about this at CompUSA once, and two clerks (who seemed to know what they were talking about) agreed that many dedicated CD-players had trouble with music burned above 4x, and occasionally even with 4x. I burn at 4x, and only rarely have trouble (usually with older equipment).
Although there are probably exceptions, don't trust anything that anyone says at Comp USA. They tend to have more experience sounding like they know what they are talking about than they do actually knowing what they are talking about. Otherwise, they wouldn't be working at Comp USA.

The CDs I have burned at 48x work just as well as the CDs I have burned at 4x. So long as you don't have the interference problems I mentioned above, there is no reason why recording speed should be a factor in how well the CD-R plays back. Slower speeds merely allow for the computer to deal with quirks/errors/misreads that arise from dirty or scratched disks or lenses.
The reason for this generally is the media type that you need to burn 48x. There are some other reasons, such as when you burn so fast, you are likely to underun. Underruns are actually handled better these days, but they do so by leaving spots blank on your CD... which is obviously not good for Audio CDs. (That's where you're pops can come from).

Also, if you're copying a CD, then copying at High speed can actually be problematic as well. I recommend using Exact Audio Copy (EAC) for ripping from CD. CloneCD is pretty good at copying a CD for the same reason. They may take longer, but you'll be happier with the end result.

User avatar
Lawrence
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 2:08 pm
Location: Austin, Texas
Contact:

#14 Post by Lawrence » Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:13 pm

GemZombie wrote:The reason for this generally is the media type that you need to burn 48x. There are some other reasons, such as when you burn so fast, you are likely to underun. Underruns are actually handled better these days, but they do so by leaving spots blank on your CD... which is obviously not good for Audio CDs. (That's where you're pops can come from).
Exactly. But underun is a function of the speed of your system and the quality of your software in handling buffer underuns, not a mere function of the speed of the recording. In other words, on a system with sufficient speed (fast processor) without hardware snafus (like both source and burner being connected to the same "channel," causing traffic jams) and with efficient software that can read and burn quickly, there should be no difference in "playability" between a CD recorded at 1x and a CD burned at 48x.
Lawrence Page
Austin Lindy Hop
http://www.AustinLindy.com

User avatar
GemZombie
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:46 pm
Location: Alpharetta, GA (Formerly SLO, CA)
Contact:

#15 Post by GemZombie » Wed Dec 10, 2003 6:03 pm

I meant to say that if you're copying from a CD that is having problems reading, and writing to a CD that is burning too fast... underrun is inevitable.

It is unclear to me whether the burning problems are from copying CD's or creating music CD's from another location which wouldn't have a bottleneck.

Locked