How long do you think it will be before we can buy DVD-R burners that write to DVD-R at speeds up to 8x?
Sincerely,
Jaddie
I'm thinkin it won't be too long. However, the next major advances that we see in DVD burning tech. will probabily be in density. In other words, more than 4.7gb per disc. We should see major advances within the next few years (hopefully before).
I'm thinkin it won't be too long. However, the next major advances that we see in DVD burning tech. will probabily be in density. In other words, more than 4.7gb per disc. We should see major advances within the next few years (hopefully before).
Will the new densities be backwards compatable. will current superdrives be able to write to the new disks. I doubt it, but it would be a very nice feature
But as hmurchinson mentioned, 8x DVD+R drives are already on store shelves.
No kidding? Wow!
When I do backups I use two to three DVD-Rs and hate to take so long to burn, verify, and catalog the discs. I have the original 2x DVD-R that shipped with the 733MHz Digital Audio Power Mac G4. I burn at 1x most of the time in order to increase the likelihood that the burn will be successful. I’d love to be able to successfully burn at 8x.
Burning at slower speeds is a myth in my experience. It's about the media, not what speed you burn it.
True!
Funny, one time a guy in my school was telling people how if you burn slower your music sounds better... So I told him that he was right and he should burn all his CDs at 1x no matter what. Then I told the people he misinformed that he was dead wrong and they should never ask him anything about computers.
Funny, one time a guy in my school was telling people how if you burn slower your music sounds better... So I told him that he was right and he should burn all his CDs at 1x no matter what. Then I told the people he misinformed that he was dead wrong and they should never ask him anything about computers.
It is NOT not a myth. The faster you do something the less margin for error there is. When you burn a CD, it burns pits into the surface. Each sector of the CD has breathing room for error correction. When a CD spins at 52x vs 4x, the burners have to be much more precise. There are tools to test the surface of the CD-Rs, and they will prove to you that more errors will be present at faster speeds. In practice you may never notice anything wrong, because most errors will be "C1" errors, which the CD-ROM drives can correct. "C2" errors will almost definitely result in unreadable data, but they are few and far between.
But yes, good media is also something to watch out for. Good burners too.
It is NOT not a myth. The faster you do something the less margin for error there is. When you burn a CD, it burns pits into the surface. Each sector of the CD has breathing room for error correction. When a CD spins at 52x vs 4x, the burners have to be much more precise. There are tools to test the surface of the CD-Rs, and they will prove to you that more errors will be present at faster speeds. In practice you may never notice anything wrong, because most errors will be "C1" errors, which the CD-ROM drives can correct. "C2" errors will almost definitely result in unreadable data, but they are few and far between.
But yes, good media is also something to watch out for. Good burners too.
Again Eugene is right. While you would need "Golden Ears" to hear the differences between CD's burned at say 2x versus 16x or faster there are differences. I've seen musicians and audiphiles test the same music burned at different rates and found that with higher speeds Jitter (if accurately measured) and the blur rate rise.
I enjoy my music rather than over analyze it so I would still prefer to burn at the faster rate if time was of essence.
There have already been so many compatibility issues with DVD burning tech. that I would wait to jump on (if you haven't already) until the industry adopts a standard or at least a drive that will read and write all the different kinds. Otherwise you may end up with a really expensive hunk of worthless metal and an empty wallet.
There have already been so many compatibility issues with DVD burning tech. that I would wait to jump on (if you haven't already) until the industry adopts a standard or at least a drive that will read and write all the different kinds. Otherwise you may end up with a really expensive hunk of worthless metal and an empty wallet.
There already is a standard. DVD-R is the dvd standard, as put forth by the dvd group. DVD+R isn't aproved by the DVD group, hence why they can't use the DVD logo on the product. Both seem to be as compatibile with various players, not sure really what the differences are (I am sure someone hear could fill me/us in).
And there are drives that read and write all types, so not sure what you are referring to...
Funny, one time a guy in my school was telling people how if you burn slower your music sounds better... So I told him that he was right and he should burn all his CDs at 1x no matter what. Then I told the people he misinformed that he was dead wrong and they should never ask him anything about computers.
So does that mean you are going to apologize to that guy After all you were misinformed. What is that old saying ? "never say never" He was incorrect about the always part tho'
There already is a standard. DVD-R is the dvd standard, as put forth by the dvd group. DVD+R isn't aproved by the DVD group, hence why they can't use the DVD logo on the product. Both seem to be as compatibile with various players, not sure really what the differences are (I am sure someone hear could fill me/us in).
And there are drives that read and write all types, so not sure what you are referring to...
DVD-R and DVD+R are competing industry standards, but the term "standard" may be misleading as neither is backed by any international third-party standards organization. DVD-R/RW is backed by the DVD Forum, as you mentioned, while DVD+R is backed by the DVD+RW Alliance. Each group is just a consortium of companies, nothing more, nothing less. However, the standards are technically so similar that their primary differences are in software rather than hardware, hence the relatively easy emergence of combo DVD+/-RW drives.
It is NOT not a myth. The faster you do something the less margin for error there is. When you burn a CD, it burns pits into the surface. Each sector of the CD has breathing room for error correction. When a CD spins at 52x vs 4x, the burners have to be much more precise. There are tools to test the surface of the CD-Rs, and they will prove to you that more errors will be present at faster speeds. In practice you may never notice anything wrong, because most errors will be "C1" errors, which the CD-ROM drives can correct. "C2" errors will almost definitely result in unreadable data, but they are few and far between.
But yes, good media is also something to watch out for. Good burners too.
I understand that... You are very right. But that was not the quality he was talking about.
He was referring to depth and crispness... not pops, skips and crackels...
He said that... "When a [mp3] CD is burned, it will sound worse then the mp3 files on your hard drive, unless you burn it slow. When you burn music at high speeds it sounds flat compared to slow burned music."
It is NOT not a myth. The faster you do something the less margin for error there is. When you burn a CD, it burns pits into the surface. Each sector of the CD has breathing room for error correction. When a CD spins at 52x vs 4x, the burners have to be much more precise. There are tools to test the surface of the CD-Rs, and they will prove to you that more errors will be present at faster speeds. In practice you may never notice anything wrong, because most errors will be "C1" errors, which the CD-ROM drives can correct. "C2" errors will almost definitely result in unreadable data, but they are few and far between.
I used to be an audiophile and I still have compressed air and a lens cloth to clean CDs before they go anywhere near my Slot loading SuperDrive but come on. If you read about it, there is also "pit smearing" if you burn too slow. I read an article that stated faster burn speeds were more accurate, I think in Wired, I can't remember, I'll look.
Think about it. It's being burned a LASER. A "frickin' laser beam" if you will. So the longer it's exposed...well ok I'm not being serious, but seriously, if the CD drive is rated at 48x it is rated at 48x for a damn reason. Audiophiles are funny...I know, I'm one of them.
Comments
Originally posted by Jaddie
Dear Friends
How long do you think it will be before we can buy DVD-R burners that write to DVD-R at speeds up to 8x?
Sincerely,
Jaddie
I'm thinkin it won't be too long. However, the next major advances that we see in DVD burning tech. will probabily be in density. In other words, more than 4.7gb per disc. We should see major advances within the next few years (hopefully before).
Originally posted by DMBand0026
I'm thinkin it won't be too long. However, the next major advances that we see in DVD burning tech. will probabily be in density. In other words, more than 4.7gb per disc. We should see major advances within the next few years (hopefully before).
Will the new densities be backwards compatable. will current superdrives be able to write to the new disks. I doubt it, but it would be a very nice feature
Of equally exciting news. Dual Layer recording isn't that far off. http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/10/07/dvdr/
8.5GB per Disc. The only thing I wonder about is compatibility. I don't want to assume current DVDs will handle consumer Dual Layer easily just yet.
But as hmurchinson mentioned, 8x DVD+R drives are already on store shelves.
But as hmurchinson mentioned, 8x DVD+R drives are already on store shelves.
No kidding? Wow!
When I do backups I use two to three DVD-Rs and hate to take so long to burn, verify, and catalog the discs. I have the original 2x DVD-R that shipped with the 733MHz Digital Audio Power Mac G4. I burn at 1x most of the time in order to increase the likelihood that the burn will be successful. I’d love to be able to successfully burn at 8x.
Thanks for responding to my query, guys.
Sincerely,
Jaddie
Originally posted by Aquatic
Burning at slower speeds is a myth in my experience. It's about the media, not what speed you burn it.
True!
Funny, one time a guy in my school was telling people how if you burn slower your music sounds better...
Originally posted by \\/\\/ickes
True!
Funny, one time a guy in my school was telling people how if you burn slower your music sounds better...
It is NOT not a myth. The faster you do something the less margin for error there is. When you burn a CD, it burns pits into the surface. Each sector of the CD has breathing room for error correction. When a CD spins at 52x vs 4x, the burners have to be much more precise. There are tools to test the surface of the CD-Rs, and they will prove to you that more errors will be present at faster speeds. In practice you may never notice anything wrong, because most errors will be "C1" errors, which the CD-ROM drives can correct. "C2" errors will almost definitely result in unreadable data, but they are few and far between.
But yes, good media is also something to watch out for. Good burners too.
Originally posted by Eugene
It is NOT not a myth. The faster you do something the less margin for error there is. When you burn a CD, it burns pits into the surface. Each sector of the CD has breathing room for error correction. When a CD spins at 52x vs 4x, the burners have to be much more precise. There are tools to test the surface of the CD-Rs, and they will prove to you that more errors will be present at faster speeds. In practice you may never notice anything wrong, because most errors will be "C1" errors, which the CD-ROM drives can correct. "C2" errors will almost definitely result in unreadable data, but they are few and far between.
But yes, good media is also something to watch out for. Good burners too.
Again Eugene is right. While you would need "Golden Ears" to hear the differences between CD's burned at say 2x versus 16x or faster there are differences. I've seen musicians and audiphiles test the same music burned at different rates and found that with higher speeds Jitter (if accurately measured) and the blur rate rise.
I enjoy my music rather than over analyze it so I would still prefer to burn at the faster rate if time was of essence.
Originally posted by DMBand0026
There have already been so many compatibility issues with DVD burning tech. that I would wait to jump on (if you haven't already) until the industry adopts a standard or at least a drive that will read and write all the different kinds. Otherwise you may end up with a really expensive hunk of worthless metal and an empty wallet.
There already is a standard. DVD-R is the dvd standard, as put forth by the dvd group. DVD+R isn't aproved by the DVD group, hence why they can't use the DVD logo on the product. Both seem to be as compatibile with various players, not sure really what the differences are (I am sure someone hear could fill me/us in).
And there are drives that read and write all types, so not sure what you are referring to...
Originally posted by \\/\\/ickes
True!
Funny, one time a guy in my school was telling people how if you burn slower your music sounds better...
So does that mean you are going to apologize to that guy
Originally posted by kupan787
There already is a standard. DVD-R is the dvd standard, as put forth by the dvd group. DVD+R isn't aproved by the DVD group, hence why they can't use the DVD logo on the product. Both seem to be as compatibile with various players, not sure really what the differences are (I am sure someone hear could fill me/us in).
And there are drives that read and write all types, so not sure what you are referring to...
DVD-R and DVD+R are competing industry standards, but the term "standard" may be misleading as neither is backed by any international third-party standards organization. DVD-R/RW is backed by the DVD Forum, as you mentioned, while DVD+R is backed by the DVD+RW Alliance. Each group is just a consortium of companies, nothing more, nothing less. However, the standards are technically so similar that their primary differences are in software rather than hardware, hence the relatively easy emergence of combo DVD+/-RW drives.
http://www.dvdrw.com/
http://www.dvdforum.org/
Originally posted by Eugene
It is NOT not a myth. The faster you do something the less margin for error there is. When you burn a CD, it burns pits into the surface. Each sector of the CD has breathing room for error correction. When a CD spins at 52x vs 4x, the burners have to be much more precise. There are tools to test the surface of the CD-Rs, and they will prove to you that more errors will be present at faster speeds. In practice you may never notice anything wrong, because most errors will be "C1" errors, which the CD-ROM drives can correct. "C2" errors will almost definitely result in unreadable data, but they are few and far between.
But yes, good media is also something to watch out for. Good burners too.
I understand that... You are very right. But that was not the quality he was talking about.
He was referring to depth and crispness... not pops, skips and crackels...
He said that... "When a [mp3] CD is burned, it will sound worse then the mp3 files on your hard drive, unless you burn it slow. When you burn music at high speeds it sounds flat compared to slow burned music."
This is why I corrected him.
It is NOT not a myth. The faster you do something the less margin for error there is. When you burn a CD, it burns pits into the surface. Each sector of the CD has breathing room for error correction. When a CD spins at 52x vs 4x, the burners have to be much more precise. There are tools to test the surface of the CD-Rs, and they will prove to you that more errors will be present at faster speeds. In practice you may never notice anything wrong, because most errors will be "C1" errors, which the CD-ROM drives can correct. "C2" errors will almost definitely result in unreadable data, but they are few and far between.
I used to be an audiophile and I still have compressed air and a lens cloth to clean CDs before they go anywhere near my Slot loading SuperDrive but come on. If you read about it, there is also "pit smearing" if you burn too slow. I read an article that stated faster burn speeds were more accurate, I think in Wired, I can't remember, I'll look.
Think about it. It's being burned a LASER. A "frickin' laser beam" if you will. So the longer it's exposed...well ok I'm not being serious, but seriously, if the CD drive is rated at 48x it is rated at 48x for a damn reason. Audiophiles are funny...I know, I'm one of them.
Originally posted by Eugene
"pit smearing" won't effect decent/recent CD drive. In fact, the Yamaha burners have a setting that creates longer pits and gaps intentionally.
Why would they want to do that?