real cd quality vs burned cd quality

[yacob.naif 10+ year member]

he wasn't askin' about mp3's, i don't think

 

[Chevyaudio 5,000+ posts]

I only buy CD's //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

I can here a huge difference between a 196kb CD and a real CD.

 

[kingpin_jeffie 10+ year member]

Well considering that 320 kbps is roughly cd quality...anything less will obviously not sound as good.

As far as direct copies of cd's go, the burner and media has alot to do with it. Not saying you need the expensive a** cd-r's or the expensive a** burner but cheapest isnt always best.

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

For rap, i hate to say it, but who cares? honestly, I like rap, but it's one of the few genres of music where it really doesn't matter that awful much. Spoken word combines with digitally synethized low end doesn't really need to be "that" detailed. The fact that an actual CD was louder is because of a decreased volume level durign the burning process. Many decent programs allow you to change it.

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

properly? The point of being digital is that there is no "properly" Either the point exists or it doesnt'. Reed solomon coding prevents nearly any chance of a 0 being read as a 1. Jitter also won't exits within a CD, sure it may be induced through playback, but a CD is simply a storage device, it can't have "jitter"

 

[95mx6gold 10+ year member]

exactly. there is no such thing as "95% correct" when it comes to digital. if your burner writes even one erroneous bit to the CD, it really sucks. imagine if this was a data CD that you were burning and not an audio disc. one incorrect bit would render the entire CD worthless.

most CD burning programs have an option to verify the disc bit by bit after it has been written to. you will see by doing this that properly burned CDs are ALWAYS 100% exact copies of the source.

 

[wesl56 10+ year member]

ok so i decided to look into this some more...

It should be pointed out that, while digitally extracted audio is an exact copy of the data on the CD, it's an exact copy as your CD player perceives it. Different drives or different runs with the same drive can extract slightly different data from the same disc. The differences are usually inaudible, however. Some newer drives will report the number of uncorrectable errors encountered, so you can get a sense for how accurate the extraction really is.
The quality of the audio on the duplicate CD-R, given a high-quality extraction, depends mostly on how well your CD player gets along with the brand of media you're using. See the next section for some comments about avoiding clicks and pops.

Some older drives have trouble starting at the exact start of audio tracks. The extraction starts a few blocks forward of where it should, and ends a few blocks later, so the track may not sound quite right and the extraction program will report errors at the end of the last track. See section (4-19).

this basically saying that quality is not necessarily lost when burning the data, but when reading it... so if you're using an old or crappy/cheap cd reader to copy the original from, there will be some quality loss on the duplicate

One user was told by Yamaha tech support that crackling (similar to a dirty vinyl LP) was a symptom of laser misalignment. If you've been writing audio CDs for quite a while, but lately you've been getting "crackly" results from tried-and-true media, this might be the culprit.

again with older/low quality hardware

many CDROM readers do not perform error correction of the data when doing raw sectors reads. As a result, you end up with errors on the copy that may or may not be correctable. When you make a second-generation copy of the same disc, you will make a disc that has all of the errors of the first copy, plus all of the new errors from the second reading of the disc. The cumulative errors from multiple copies will result in a disc that is no longer readable.
Audio tracks don't have the second layer of ECC, and will be susceptible to the same generation loss as data discs duplicated in "raw" mode. Some drives may turn off some error-correcting features, such as dropped-sample interpolation, during digital audio extraction, or may only use them when extracting at 1x.

audio tracks dont have ECC data and may have errors when duplicated

this site: http://www.cdrfaq.org/ has an assload more info, including some stuff about ripping/burning at slower or faster speeds

though the data on the cd may be stored in digital format, it is still read by an analog process (laser reading the sectors) and errors still occur during the reading/extraction process, and the burning process... depending on the equipment used and even the quality of the media.. so it is very unlikely that a duplicate of an original cd is going to be exactly the same quality...

 

[bamaboy 5,000+ posts]

i can notie the difference from songs i get on napster to songs i get from limewire and such, im thinking people encode it at like 64kbps then re-encode at 320 so i will down load it //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/eyebrow.gif.fe2c18d8720fe8c7eaed347b21ea05a5.gif

i can take the same song from where i downloaded it, and then compare it to one of my napster's and the napster's bass is better and words are better, but mainly you can hear a difference in the bass

store bought cd's FTW

 

[helotaxi 5,000+ posts]

If digital were perfect, computers would never crash. If the read/write process were perfect, it would be existing outside of reality. As mentioned above, the reader will make mistakes. Even if it makes a perfect burn writing exactly what it read, it didn't read exactly what's on the disc. Those read errors will get transferred to the burn.

 

[theCybe 5,000+ posts]

A computer shouldn't ever crash, unless it has a thermal problem.

Computers crash because programmers do not adhere to a standard in coding.

If my program (1 minus 1 = x. Write x to register A) writes to a register, and doesn't clean up after itself, that register may cause your program (Divide 1 by x from register A) to crash upon reading it - of course, avoidable with proper precautions.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[wesl56 10+ year member]

A computer shouldn't ever crash, unless it has a thermal problem.

unless its running windows lawlz //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/hilarious.gif.02a037aad04aa96f19982b298a3d70a8.gif

 

[helotaxi 5,000+ posts]

A computer shouldn't ever crash, unless it has a thermal problem.
Computers crash because programmers do not adhere to a standard in coding.

If my program (1 minus 1 = x. Write x to register A) writes to a register, and doesn't clean up after itself, that register may cause your program (Divide 1 by x from register A) to crash upon reading it - of course, avoidable with proper precautions.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

We run a Unix based system at work and guess what? It crashes all the time. Temp aint the problem either. Go MilSpec!

The aircraft I fly is all digital databus as well and it glitches all the time, too. It happens. A totally non-random machine is a lot more random than you would like to believe.

 

[SQBubble 10+ year member]

sound card on ur computer also affect the sound of all ur mp3's, with a better sound card, u can notice difference when burning cd's...

 

[wesl56 10+ year member]

sound card on ur computer also affect the sound of all ur mp3's, with a better sound card, u can notice difference when burning cd's...

the sound card only has to do with playback on the computer... hell you dont even need a soundcard to burn mp3s to a cd

 

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

There is a difference, quite large to me. I have the Jeezy CD burned from 196 kbps MP3s and the original copy is MUCH clearer and not to mention LOUDER than the burned copy.

ive got a crunk juice cd original and burned copy...the differences are like night and day as far as the bass goes.

and for those of you saying there is no difference from one burned cd to the 5th copy...you're WAYYY off...look it up on the net, you will immediately change your argument.