🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: rec.audio.tech
Article #1149

Re: Audio quality of CDR, any theory ????

#1149
From: Brendan Heading
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 00:00
44 lines
2780 bytes
In article <F308098DC0C8DC2F.31FD14AE39298D33.674812088DCBAA2A@library-
proxy.airnews.net>, Chung <kclee@hk.gin.net> writes
>Could you made sure your CD reader could 100% read the CD without
>error?  If yes (ie.100% correct),

Yes, because the CD reader has error correction when can fix the errors
during reading.

> why there are so expansive CD
>transport on selling? 

You pay more for a higher quality playback sound. That doesn't matter
what type of CD you're using.

> If No (have error), than even CDR 100% correct,
>It still have error signal Recorded, then sound different.

That would be correct; but the CD reader corrects all of the errors when
reading the disc.

>Audio CD format has no error correction such as the "Check sum" of
>Computer CD ROM. 

Yes it does. Using a checksum is only necessary for computer data where
a high degree of reliability in reading must be guaranteed. The
correction system used by audio CD is good enough for audio CD playback.

> So, even error, the transport (or reader) don't know
>and will no correction made.  Only the DAC will check for reasonable
>signal and correct it.

In a CD player the error correction is done in real time immediately
before the DAC.

>I have tested it before. It is a big different, which no need AB
>repeat comparing.  It's quality similar to the cheap illegal CD clone.

-- 
        Brendan Heading
http://www.heading.demon.co.uk (updated every Thursday)
ICQ : 24010538
(please remove obvious spamguard to reply by email)

"The appeal to patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel"
Technical Details
Message-ID: <d6UPeXAfMmd2EwoM@heading.demon.co.uk>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <753ar1$p8u$1@justice.csc.cuhk.edu.hk> <F308098DC0C8DC2F.31FD14AE39298D33.674812088DCBAA2A@library-proxy.airnews.net>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 109f11,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid109f11,public
X-Google-Thread: 105a81,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid105a81,public
X-Google-Thread: 10ff83,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid10ff83,public
X-Google-Thread: f6728,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gidf6728,public
X-Google-Thread: 10d85e,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid10d85e,public
X-Google-Thread: fb1f8,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gidfb1f8,public
From: Brendan Heading <brendan@NOSPAMheading.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Audio quality of CDR, any theory ????
Date: 1998/12/15
Message-ID: <d6UPeXAfMmd2EwoM@heading.demon.co.uk>
X-Deja-AN: 422569687
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: heading.demon.co.uk:194.222.2.8
References: <753ar1$p8u$1@justice.csc.cuhk.edu.hk> <F308098DC0C8DC2F.31FD14AE39298D33.674812088DCBAA2A@library-proxy.airnews.net>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 913745102 nnrp-04:26494 NO-IDENT heading.demon.co.uk:194.222.2.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.misc,hk.rec.audio-visual,uk.rec.audio,tw.bbs.rec.audiophile