[sdiy] OT: Scratchy CDs

[Michael Boracci]

http://www.osta.org/technology/cdqa5.htm

This is a link I got using Altavista  Says that 1x is an exception and other
interesting things < but I see what you are saying about speeds above 2x
being regraded as more consistent.

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
[mailto:owner-synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl]On Behalf Of Jilt van Moorst
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 5:16 PM
To: music.maker at gte.net; synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
Subject: RE: [sdiy] OT: Scratchy CDs


ok destruction was definitely too strongly put, but I did a little
searching as I was sure I had heard something like this

http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22The+physic
s%2C+chemistry+and+thermodynamics+of+the+recording+process%22&btnG=Google+Se
arch

excuse the long url, but this quote seems to come from either maxell or
OSTA (Optical Storage Technology Association)

"The physics, chemistry and thermodynamics of the recording process seem to
produce more consistent and readable marks within the CD-R recording layer
when the recording speed is 2X or higher. This may be due to the annealing
process of pit formation at 1X where the heat caused by the laser remains
focused on the pit for a longer time."

I know of both the case for slow audio burning and there is supposedly a
case for faster burning, so I'm still not sure what the optimum speed is,
always felt CD burning was the last voodoo factor in computing..

Jilt van Moorst

At 11:17 AM 9/23/2003 -0800, Scott Gravenhorst wrote:
>I would rather imagine that a "sweet speed" would probably depend on the
>manufacturer of the drive and even the model within their selection of
>drives.  I would expect cheaper drives to perform more poorly.  BTW, I
don't
>doubt your research, but I had never before heard of CDR being destroyed by
>burning at 1X.
>
>Also, this has been a very informative OT thread.  In fact, since many/most
>of us record music (DIY) one might even say that it was never OT in the
first
>place.
>
>Thanks list...
>
>Jilt van Moorst <jilt at robotfunk.com> wrote:
> >OK this was certainly true a few years ago, when 4x burning was 'pretty
> >darn fast' but in the 52x age you can actually destroy your cd's by
> >overheating them when burning that slow, most recent burners won't allow
> >such low speeds anyway. I'd like to see some updated reports on the
current
> >audio burning speed sweet spot .
> >
> >Jilt van Moorst






____________________________________________________________
Free 20MB Web Site Hosting and Personalized E-mail Service!
Get It Now At Doteasy.com http://www.doteasy.com/et/