burning HDCD

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
> Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how
> can
> I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd?


http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html

Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of
any computer software that is available to encode.

Microsoft purchased Pacific Microsonics and HDCD technology a few years back
now and I would imagine that a portion of that technology has trickled into
the WM codecs and encoders but I can't say for sure. I have not heard much
new about HDCD in the recent past.

Charles Tomaras
Seattle, WA

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Charles Tomaras <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:
> "Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
> news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
> > Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how
> > can
> > I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd?

> http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html

> Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of
> any computer software that is available to encode.

The NAD is an HDCD-ready CD player. But he doesn't need it to burn HDCDs,
nor could he use it to burn one. He can just use a standard computer drive.
Ripping an HDCD to hard disc as a set of uncompressed
..wav file will preserve the encoding. A CDR burned from such .wavs will also be
HDCD encoded.

--

-S.
Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. --
spiffy <thatsright@excite.co>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message news:<ca5ei001r8a@news2.newsguy.com>...
> "Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
> news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
>> Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not
aware of
> any computer software that is available to encode.
>

I did burn one HDCD using NERO. The copy when played using Window
media Player 9, it showed HDCD playback. I doubt this is accurate but
I just do not why it showed HDCD playback. I do not have a HDCD player
for verifying. Anyway the sound was horrible unlike the original. I
think it cheaper to buy your second CD rather than investing in High
End burner.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 9 Jun 2004 23:57:49 GMT, tchelvam@hotmail.com (TChelvam) wrote:

>"Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message news:<ca5ei001r8a@news2.newsguy.com>...
>> "Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
>> news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
>>> Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not
>aware of
>> any computer software that is available to encode.
>>
>
>I did burn one HDCD using NERO. The copy when played using Window
>media Player 9, it showed HDCD playback. I doubt this is accurate but
>I just do not why it showed HDCD playback. I do not have a HDCD player
>for verifying. Anyway the sound was horrible unlike the original. I
>think it cheaper to buy your second CD rather than investing in High
>End burner.

I've copied HDCD discs on my PC using EAC and the copies are HDCD as
indicated by the standalone player and sound excellent.

Kal

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
news:nYDxc.4691$jw.1840@attbi_s04...
> Charles Tomaras <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:
>> "Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
>> news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
>> > Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know
>> > how
>> > can
>> > I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd?
>
>> http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html
>
>> Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of
>> any computer software that is available to encode.
>
> The NAD is an HDCD-ready CD player. But he doesn't need it to burn HDCDs,
> nor could he use it to burn one. He can just use a standard computer
> drive.
> Ripping an HDCD to hard disc as a set of uncompressed
> .wav file will preserve the encoding. A CDR burned from such .wavs will
> also be
> HDCD encoded.

Where does one find computer software to encode HDCD? I'd like a link if you
know of something or some plug-in. I was not aware that anything was
available.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

TChelvam <tchelvam@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message news:<ca5ei001r8a@news2.newsguy.com>...
> > "Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
> > news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
> >> Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not
> aware of
> > any computer software that is available to encode.
> >

> I did burn one HDCD using NERO. The copy when played using Window
> media Player 9, it showed HDCD playback. I doubt this is accurate but
> I just do not why it showed HDCD playback.

? It showed HDCD playback because it was HDCD encoded.
Media Playuer 9 can detect and decode HDCD. Microsoft
bought the HDCD process some years ago; Media PLayer is about
the only place it's likely to survive.

Like I said, an HDCD copied digitally, will retain the HDCD encoding.

> I do not have a HDCD player
> for verifying. Anyway the sound was horrible unlike the original. I
> think it cheaper to buy your second CD rather than investing in High
> End burner.

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point.
If you used Nero I assume you did the ripping/burning on a
computer disc CDRW drive, with Nero as the ripping/burning
software. Your copy should sound identical to the original.

--

-S.
Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. --
spiffy <thatsright@excite.co>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Charles Tomaras <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:
> "Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:nYDxc.4691$jw.1840@attbi_s04...
> > Charles Tomaras <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:
> >> "Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
> >> news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
> >> > Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know
> >> > how
> >> > can
> >> > I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd?
> >
> >> http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html
> >
> >> Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of
> >> any computer software that is available to encode.
> >
> > The NAD is an HDCD-ready CD player. But he doesn't need it to burn HDCDs,
> > nor could he use it to burn one. He can just use a standard computer
> > drive.
> > Ripping an HDCD to hard disc as a set of uncompressed
> > .wav file will preserve the encoding. A CDR burned from such .wavs will
> > also be
> > HDCD encoded.

> Where does one find computer software to encode HDCD? I'd like a link if you
> know of something or some plug-in. I was not aware that anything was
> available.

There are none that I know of. You can't encode something in HDCD.
You can only preserve and copy the HDCD encoding of something that's already HDCD.
(You can also destroy the encoding, by converting the .wav to mp3 or
other lossy compressed format).

Pretty much *ANY* CDRW drive and any disc ripping/burnign software that
saves the rip as .wav, will preserve the HDCD encoding of an HDCD disc.
(I presume a disc image will also work, though I haven't tried that).



--

-S.
Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. --
spiffy <thatsright@excite.co>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"TChelvam" <tchelvam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ca885t08hc@news1.newsguy.com...
> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
> news:<ca5ei001r8a@news2.newsguy.com>...
>> "Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
>> news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
>>> Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not
> aware of
>> any computer software that is available to encode.
>>
>
> I did burn one HDCD using NERO. The copy when played using Window
> media Player 9, it showed HDCD playback. I doubt this is accurate but
> I just do not why it showed HDCD playback. I do not have a HDCD player
> for verifying. Anyway the sound was horrible unlike the original. I
> think it cheaper to buy your second CD rather than investing in High
> End burner.


So I think you are saying that you "copied" an existing HDCD disc not that
you HDCD encoded existing 20 or 24 bit wav files. As far as I know there
aren't any mainstream computer encoding applications that do the HDCD
processing/encoding.

Charles Tomaras

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Charles Tomaras wrote:
> "Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
> news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
>
>>Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how
>>can
>>I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd?
>
>
>
> http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html
>
> Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of
> any computer software that is available to encode.
>
> Microsoft purchased Pacific Microsonics and HDCD technology a few years back
> now and I would imagine that a portion of that technology has trickled into
> the WM codecs and encoders but I can't say for sure. I have not heard much
> new about HDCD in the recent past.
>
> Charles Tomaras
> Seattle, WA
>
Why? HDCD is a dead format walking. Why not DVD audio?

CD

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"codifus" <codifus@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:cab0ot011m@news4.newsguy.com...
> Charles Tomaras wrote:
>> "Antani" <alex.delpippa@droga.it> wrote in message
>> news:ca2r3s02siq@news4.newsguy.com...
>>
>>>Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how
>>>can
>>>I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd?
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html
>>
>> Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of
>> any computer software that is available to encode.
>>
>> Microsoft purchased Pacific Microsonics and HDCD technology a few years
>> back now and I would imagine that a portion of that technology has
>> trickled into the WM codecs and encoders but I can't say for sure. I have
>> not heard much new about HDCD in the recent past.
>>
>> Charles Tomaras
>> Seattle, WA
> Why? HDCD is a dead format walking. Why not DVD audio?
>
> CD

Exactly my feelings. I imagine Microsoft purchased Pacific Microsonics for
the code base and mind power they had. It certainly was not to actively push
HDCD.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message news:<bBZxc.76626$Ly.57011@attbi_s01>...

> Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point.
> If you used Nero I assume you did the ripping/burning on a
> computer disc CDRW drive, with Nero as the ripping/burning
> software. Your copy should sound identical to the original.

Not so. It depends how good is your writer. Compared the spcetrogram
in Nero wave editor and the difference is obvious. though in my PC
both original and copy sounded the same. But I don't expect much out
of a $30 CD writer.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"TChelvam" <tchelvam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qCiyc.32150$Sw.26530@attbi_s51...
> Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:<bBZxc.76626$Ly.57011@attbi_s01>...
>
>> Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point.
>> If you used Nero I assume you did the ripping/burning on a
>> computer disc CDRW drive, with Nero as the ripping/burning
>> software. Your copy should sound identical to the original.
>
> Not so. It depends how good is your writer. Compared the spcetrogram
> in Nero wave editor and the difference is obvious. though in my PC
> both original and copy sounded the same. But I don't expect much out
> of a $30 CD writer.

If you had gone to the expense to use the BLACK CD blanks you would have
been far happier!  

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

TChelvam <tchelvam@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message news:<bBZxc.76626$Ly.57011@attbi_s01>...

> > Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point.
> > If you used Nero I assume you did the ripping/burning on a
> > computer disc CDRW drive, with Nero as the ripping/burning
> > software. Your copy should sound identical to the original.

> Not so. It depends how good is your writer.

Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't,
there's something deficient about your setup.

Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days.

--

-S.
Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. --
spiffy <thatsright@excite.co>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message news:<splAc.64833$0y.23491@attbi_s03>...
> Chelvam <chelvam@myjaring.net> wrote:
> > "Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
> > news:_Xvyc.20896$0y.12072@attbi_s03...
>
> > >
> > > Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't,
> > > there's something deficient about your setup.
> > >
> > > Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days.
> > >
>
> > No again.
>
> Don't know what to tell you except -- I can generate verifiably
> bit-perfect copies of digital tracks, using EAC, in a matter of minutes.
>

Yes, agreed but to say the quality of writer is immaterial is bit
unrealistic. Even the Nero knowledge base/ manuals recommend good
writer for copying audio CD.

I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results.
If you are right I accept that without any qualm/

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Ban" <bansuri@web.de> wrote in message news:<51kAc.65433$HG.50568@attbi_s53>...
> Chelvam wrote:
>
> I suggest anyone doubting my survey to execute it oneself and see. I can be
> helpful if you have problems operating the editing software, drop me an
> email.
>

Maybe the urban myth is more than what I bargain for to support my
earlier assertation that to make a perfect copy you need a good
hardware (CD writer).

On the color of CDR, I know nothing about it since I have only burned
3 audio CD and did not like the quality.

I find it bit hard to believe that a $200 CD writer and $30 are the
same. But I agree with you that you can make perfect copies.

Cheers.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

TChelvam <tchelvam@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message news:<splAc.64833$0y.23491@attbi_s03>...
> > Chelvam <chelvam@myjaring.net> wrote:
> > > "Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
> > > news:_Xvyc.20896$0y.12072@attbi_s03...
> >
> > > >
> > > > Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't,
> > > > there's something deficient about your setup.
> > > >
> > > > Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days.
> > > >
> >
> > > No again.
> >
> > Don't know what to tell you except -- I can generate verifiably
> > bit-perfect copies of digital tracks, using EAC, in a matter of minutes.
> >

> Yes, agreed but to say the quality of writer is immaterial is bit
> unrealistic. Even the Nero knowledge base/ manuals recommend good
> writer for copying audio CD.

I never said the quality of the CD writer was immaterial. I did say it
was a trivial matter to make bit-perfect copies these days. I also soaid
that if your copies sounded different from your originals, then there was
something awry with your CD burning setup.


> I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results.
> If you are right I accept that without any qualm/

Have you determined that your writer is, in fact, at fault?


--

-S.
Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. --
spiffy <thatsright@excite.co>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

TChelvam wrote:

> "Ban" <bansuri@web.de> wrote in message news:<51kAc.65433$HG.50568@attbi_s53>...
>> Chelvam wrote:
>>
>> I suggest anyone doubting my survey to execute it oneself and see. I can be
>> helpful if you have problems operating the editing software, drop me an
>> email.
>>
>
> Maybe the urban myth is more than what I bargain for to support my
> earlier assertation that to make a perfect copy you need a good
> hardware (CD writer).
>
> On the color of CDR, I know nothing about it since I have only burned
> 3 audio CD and did not like the quality.
>
> I find it bit hard to believe that a $200 CD writer and $30 are the
> same.

That $30 drive might have cost $200 two years ago.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

chung wrote:
>
> That $30 drive might have cost $200 two years ago.

I used an Aopen CRW5232 burner costing 32Euros now. I bought it on Xmas for
45Euros. Great drive lets you grab audio-cds at 27times average without the
slightest error and all the CDRs I burn 52 times, just 150seconds for a
copy.
I made a few more checks in the meantime with the same results: Could not
find a single bit error up to now. I also checked disks burnt on my other 2
drives and they are also identical. So the technology seemingly has pretty
much arrived at perfection.
--
ciao Ban
Bordighera, Italy

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cav9qd020mb@news3.newsguy.com...

>
> I never said the quality of the CD writer was immaterial. I did say it
> was a trivial matter to make bit-perfect copies these days. I also soaid
> that if your copies sounded different from your originals, then there was
> something awry with your CD burning setup.
>
>
> > I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results.
> > If you are right I accept that without any qualm/
>
> Have you determined that your writer is, in fact, at fault?

Writing this with my tail between my legs.

1. Apparently my Cd Burner is one of the popular choice.
2. After some tips from other forum, I reduced the write speed to the
lowest.
3. took me 16 minutes to burn one 59 minutes CD.
4. Previously, it took me about 4 minutes.
5. It sounded great that I can't tell the different between the original and
copy.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Chelvam wrote:

> "Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:cav9qd020mb@news3.newsguy.com...
>
>>
>> I never said the quality of the CD writer was immaterial. I did say it
>> was a trivial matter to make bit-perfect copies these days. I also soaid
>> that if your copies sounded different from your originals, then there was
>> something awry with your CD burning setup.
>>
>>
>> > I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results.
>> > If you are right I accept that without any qualm/
>>
>> Have you determined that your writer is, in fact, at fault?
>
> Writing this with my tail between my legs.
>
> 1. Apparently my Cd Burner is one of the popular choice.
> 2. After some tips from other forum, I reduced the write speed to the
> lowest.
> 3. took me 16 minutes to burn one 59 minutes CD.
> 4. Previously, it took me about 4 minutes.

That has more to do with the CD blank than the player, I think. Some
older blank CD-R's are optimized for slow-speed writing, while the new
blanks are optimized for high-speed writing.

> 5. It sounded great that I can't tell the different between the original and
> copy.
>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Chelvam <chelvam@myjaring.net> wrote:
> "Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:cav9qd020mb@news3.newsguy.com...

> >
> > I never said the quality of the CD writer was immaterial. I did say it
> > was a trivial matter to make bit-perfect copies these days. I also soaid
> > that if your copies sounded different from your originals, then there was
> > something awry with your CD burning setup.
> >
> >
> > > I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results.
> > > If you are right I accept that without any qualm/
> >
> > Have you determined that your writer is, in fact, at fault?

> Writing this with my tail between my legs.

> 1. Apparently my Cd Burner is one of the popular choice.


What burner is this?

> 2. After some tips from other forum, I reduced the
write speed to the
> lowest.
> 3. took me 16 minutes to burn one 59 minutes CD.

That's pretty slow...and shouldn't be necessary.

> 4. Previously, it took me about 4 minutes.

15X is prett good but 40X is easily doable these days.

> 5. It sounded great that I can't tell the different between the original and
> copy.

If I were you, I'd checkto ensure that other parameters of your computer
setup were optimized. You shouldn't have to burn at ~4x to get perfect
copies unless your system is rather outdated.


--

-S.
Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. --
spiffy <thatsright@excite.co>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"TChelvam" <tchelvam@hotmail.com> wrote in message > I find it bit hard to
believe that a $200 CD writer and $30 are the
> same. But I agree with you that you can make perfect copies.

I've got a $200 toaster oven and a $20 dual slice toaster and nobody can
taste a difference in the toast.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message

> I've got a $200 toaster oven and a $20 dual slice toaster and nobody can
> taste a difference in the toast.
>

Nobody means only you?. you need independant participants.

Firstly, toasts are directional. You need to start from the side that popped
out first. Otherwise, you getting it wrong.

Also, the tougue need to be cleaned to have better contact between the toast
and tongue.