LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  August 2018

ARSCLIST August 2018

Subject:

Re: CD capacity

From:

Kurt Nauck <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 8 Aug 2018 15:59:31 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (98 lines)

Thanks to all for your help, we are now at 79:57. Those of you who get
our catalogs can expect a little bon-bon in the fall!

;-)


On 8/8/2018 9:57 AM, Gary A. Galo wrote:
> The issue that was raised by Randy Riddle regarding the 2-second gap between tracks should only be an issue if you're doing track-at-once burning. In other words, each track is saved as a separate file, and the burning software puts them together in the order they're numbered, and adds the default Red Book 2-seconds of silence between each track. Depending on the burning software, you may be able to defeat the 2-second gap and simply add the amount of silence you want at the end of each file (track).
>
> Professional editors do disc-at-once burning. The entire CD is assembled in one file and you simply put the amount of silence you want at the end of each track. Some will, by default, add the Red Book 2 seconds, but this can, and should, normally be defeated in the setup or preferences menus.
>
> In Sound Forge, you insert a marker at the beginning of each track, plus one at the very end of the file. Then, the markers are converted to regions - 1 region per track - and tracks are created from the regions. This way, you know exactly how long your disc will be, without having to add another 2 seconds for each track. Sound Forge supports the Red Book ability to have index points within tracks. After the markers have been converted to regions, you can add additional markers within each track to create the Red Book indices. But, it's been ages since any CD players have supported the access of indices between tracks, so putting them there is pointless.
>
> Remember that the Red Book CD mastering spec also includes 2 seconds of silence before the first track commences.
>
> I agree with the comments that have been made about keeping the total time to 79:58, and I would only add that this should include the 2 seconds before the first track.
>
> The Red Book time limit of just over 74 minutes is a very dated specification. No modern CD or multi-format player should have any problems playing an 80 minute disc, and if you keep the total time, including the 2 seconds before the first track, to 79:58, most modern duplicators shouldn't have a problem.
>
> I have a number of commercial CDs that exceed 80 minutes, and one that's around 81:30. My players don't have any problem with them. But, 80 minute CD-Rs are meant for no more than 80 minutes TOTAL. Don't try to push them beyond that limit.
>
> The 74+ minute time limit was related to the Red Book specification for the nominal spacing between the data spirals on the disc. As laser pickups got better, CD manufacturers pushed this to the edge of the tolerance and beyond, increasing the record/play time to 80 minutes or more. If you have an old player that won't track an 80-minute disc, it'd probably time for a new player.
>
> I would also add that you should never burn music CDs at the maximum possible speed. Each combination of CD-R brand and burner seems to have a sweet spot where the discs are burned with the lowest number of errors. For the Taiyo-Yuden/JVC CD-Rs I've found that the lowest number of errors occurs when they're burned in 12X in a CD burner, and 16X in a DVD burner. I've measured the errors with Nero DiscSpeed. My DiscMakers DVD duplicator came set to 16X for CD-Rs as default. Moving it in either direction made it worse - they got it right.
>
> Best,
> Gary
> ____________________________
>
> Gary Galo
> Audio Engineer Emeritus
> The Crane School of Music
> SUNY at Potsdam, NY 13676
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Stamler
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 1:03 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CD capacity
>
> On 8/7/2018 10:06 PM, Kurt Nauck wrote:
>> The comments have been great. But they've left me with some questions.
>>
>> I have 79:54 of material at this stage, which includes fade transitions,
>> but no actual intervals.
> There are probably a few seconds of silence at the end of each cut,
> which you might consider shopping.
>
>> The duplicator I spoke to told me that a full 80 min CD can lead to
>> problems in the duplication process - that the closer you get to the
>> middle, the greater the potential tracking problems. That comment was
>> the genesis of my question. Should I be concerned? Can this be mitigated
>> by a higher quality blank?
> First off, do remember that a CD plays from the inside out, so the
> problematic tracks would probably be at the end of the album.
>
>> I did consider running a compression in Audition as Lou suggested. But I
>> know that to shrink an image file by an odd figure can leave some
>> unpleasant artifacting, and I assume the same may be true for audio
>> files as well. If I bought myself 20 seconds by squeezing the tracks,
>> will that prove to be problematic? It probably would be for those with
>> perfect pitch!
> You can shorten them via resampling by a few percent while leaving the
> pitch as is -- Audition, for example, will let you do that. Thing is, it
> works best on 32-bit floating-point files, so for best results you'd
> need to shrink the files before they're dithere down to 16 bit.
>> If a person with an older player not designed to handle an 80 minute
>> disc attempts to play one, what would be the result? Would he not be
>> able to hear the beginning, the end, or would he just have tracking
>> problems throughout?
> I'd guess throughout; the way manufacturers get 80 minutes onto a disc
> is by departing from the usual intertrack* spacing. (*Yes, I know it's
> not really "intertrack", just as a 78 doesn't normally have "grooves" --
> just one groove per side. Whatever -- they make the disc with a
> non-standard spacing, so some players will gag all the way through as
> their servos fail to keep the laser properly focused. But I think
> players that won't play an 80-minute disc are pretty thin on the ground
> by now; correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> Peace,
> Paul Stamler
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus

--

Kurt Nauck

*Nauck's Vintage Records*
22004 Sherrod Ln
Spring, TX 77389

*www.78rpm.com* <http://78rpm.com/>
281-288-7826 | [log in to unmask]

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager