Christie Peterson wrote:
> Mike Richter wrote:
>> Poorly recorded discs are vastly more sensitive to failure over time
>> than those recorded with low error rate. In an attempt
> Hi, Mike.
> What do you consider to be low (or acceptable) C1 and C2 error rates?
> I've been running CDSpeed on my discs, which appears to give a quality
> score of "0" if there are any C2 errors at all.
> Others, please feel free to chime in as well.
I demand zero errors for C2. C1 is more a 'feel' at this point; I've not
determined what rates for peak and average mean what when they are as
low as they seem always to be when C2 is zero.
I note that my current supply of Mitsui silver has about 30% lower C1
errors than my current T-Y discs, so believe them to be 'better', but I
cannot say by how much or even whether that's significant. When I send
out masters for duplication or replication, I send one of each.
Eventually, one of the duplicators or replicators will find one that's
faulty - and will have the different master to use. So far, none has.
[log in to unmask]