letters to the editor - Letter to the Editor

Emedia Professional, Nov, 1999

CD-R Audio: Is it Safe?

I've read your review of the ACS CDXpress Plus (from 1998) and the MicroBoards A2D and AudioWrite Pro reviews from this year's July and August issues. Thank you for the great coverage of these important products and technologies. I am interested in a versatile audio CD recorder/player first, and data CD recorder second. My question is: Will audio CDs burned on all of these play on commercial CD players--those in my home stereo system, car, daughter's boom box, etc., without error?

I'm sure you are aware that some CD burners produce CDs (either CD-Rs or CD-RWs) that aren't playable on conventional CD players. I need to have a burner that delivers and plays across the board. None of the three reviews mentioned this. I'm getting pretty desperate for this machine, as I am in the early stages of producing/recording a music CD involving many musicians and have to get them copies of worN-in-progress so they have something to rehearse with.

Tom Purdy

The three systems listed above are all extremely stable products with broad media support and high reliability, and should all produce discs that work in audio players across the board. It should be noted, however, that the CDXpress Plus and A2D systems are CD duplicators that are not designed for the type of audio disc mastering you want to do. Audio professionals always err on the side of caution when it comes to mastering, and that means reducing recording speeds typically to 1X or 2X, although opinions vary on whether this is really necessary. In any event, give, the vagaries of media stability and the jitter that high-speed recording can create even in the most stable systems, it can't hurt. (Only Mitsui goes so far as to claim their media record better at higher speeds.) Duplicators with 8X capability like the A2D only record at 8X, whereas a PC or Mac-attached product like the AudioWrite Pro (or any other bundled CD-R drive) lets you choose more conservative speeds that should eliminate any concern about compatibility with any CD player out there.

What's the Fuss?

I don't understand why music companies are spending millions to control digital reproduction of copyrighted material. Sony, one of the world's largest music and electronics companies, seems to have found the answer: Simply manufacture high-tech digital players that won't recognize CD-R audio.

Let me explain. I was fortunate enough to receive a Sony DVD player for my birthday. After the initial excitement, I soon realized that my CD-R collection will not play on the machine. Yet, standard music CDs play without a problem. I don't pretend to understand all the technical reasons for this, such as dual pickups, laser wavelength, and disc reflectivity. I only understand that digital players can be manufactured to discriminate among media, even if "backwards-compatible."

Therefore, why are the music companies trying to protect their material through schemes such as watermarking, when equipment can simply be designed to accept pressed media and reject CD-Rs? Is it the MP3 scare? Sure, the entire Beatles catalog will fit on one CD using the MP3 format, with decent fidelity. However, where can it be played? From the desktop and from MP3 "Walkman" devices in one-hour chunks. Clearly, not the flexibility that most consumers want.

Randy Pace Orange Park, FL

Amen on the stifling current limitations of MP3. But beyond that ... you may be ascribing too much method to the manufacturer madness that makes some DVD players CD-R-resistant. Keep in mind that the latest Sony audio CD players are CD-R-compatible. And that many DVD-Fideo players will not play CD-Rs, including in at least one case different models from the same manufacturer. And that the entire first generation of DVD-ROM devices lacked the optics to play back CD-Rs. Check out Linden deCarmo's article in this issue, "Safety in Numbers: A Look at the Secure Digital Music Initiative," (pp. 52-58) for the latest on the "fuss" surrounding audio content protection-and what's being done about it.

Replication va. Duplication

In his most useful August 1999 CD Writer column, "The Demise of Low-Run CD Replication," Hugh Bennett contrasts the complicated and expensive process of CD replication with CD duplication as follows: "Essentially CD photocopying, duplication uses towers of chained CD recorders or autoloading systems to make copies of a master CD as are needed."

There seems to be a lot of confusion since many of us use "replication" and "duplication" in a non-specific way. What's the difference?

Ray Ortali, CEO Prime Technologies Delmar, New York

I agree that "replication" and "duplication" are often used interchangeably. For the sake of clarity, I always use the term "replication" to refer to the industrial CD/DVD manufacturing process (glass mastering, stamper, injection molding, sputtering, spin coating, etc.) and "duplication" to rear to the use of CD-R or DVD-R for making multiple disc copies.

There are also special cases which don't fall cleanly into these categories such as ODC's (http://www.optical-disc.com) "DirectCut" service, which produces glass one-off DVDs from an industrial mastering system.