Blue Note CD-Rs now on Amazon

[Shawn]

I didn't know that FLAC files could be played directly ... for editing purposes, Goldwave "extracts" a FLAC file, presumably to WAV in order to do any editing, and I don't know of an audio player that automatically plays a FLAC file. One cool thing I noticed recently with NERO is that FLAC files are recognized as sources for audio CD burning. Saves me a step when I get around to burning my backlog of Dime shows.

Dan, immediately download this free software:

http://www.foobar2000.org/

Best audio player I have ever used!

I prefer VU Player. The conversion tool is nice to have too.

Kevin

Actually, foobar just upgraded their built-in converter and it's much easier to use now.

[Guest Bill Barton]

The point, Bev, is that downloads could be offered in a lossless format like FLAC but MP3s and other compressed formats are what is being offered. The technology is exactly the same - Internet downloads - and its that technology that allows the potential to "keep a lot more music available indefinitely" and with broadband connections, the time to download isn't that much more.

I don't think its unreasonable for people to prefer non-lossy formats...

No, that's not unreasonable. I'm all for whatever technology can provide good access to music - if that can be achieved in higher and higher quality sound, so much the better.

I run a modest system - CD player, amp, speakers come to around £1000. At that level I get the music in sound that is good enough for my pleasure. I suspect all the extra wonderment I completely miss through the limitations of my set up. But I'm not prepared to go any further - I'd rather listen to more music (which is not, actually, a preference that should be reduced to a simplistic 'quantity over quality' comparison, any more than a preference for paperback books over hardbacks).

I totally appreciate the disappointment of those with high end systems who feel that they can hear a difference in quality. I'm just not convinced the market will subsidise them. I suspect...and it is a gut reaction...that even in the areas of non-mass-popular music, most people are after a very good sound, not necessarily the best.

You make some very good points here, Bev. FWIW, a few weeks ago when I was still using my old PC (a Pentium II dark-ages monster) there was no way that I could save FLAC files on the hard-drive. I was - instead - simply burning them to CD-Rs and deleting the original files. Now that I'm up to speed with a real machine I have plenty of space to save all of these files. For the first time I'm actually listening to music directly from the hard-drive. I still prefer having actual physical CDs though. For one thing, I don't use an iPod or portable MP3 player, just an old-fashioned CD deck in the car. And I prefer having stuff saved to CDs to play on my radio show even though we have the technology at the on-air studio to jack an iPod or similar device in to the board.

Your point about the relative quality of the playback equipment is a good one. My home system is also what I would refer to as mid-line (and "vintage" for the most part to boot!): an old Denon integrated amp which has Dolby surround though I don't use it; a Sony DVD/CD deck, an ancient Pioneer double-cassette deck; a NAD 5020A turntable; and a DBX satellite-subwoofer speaker system with a separate power amp from that company's brief foray into consumer audio. Recently - for the first time - I routed the computer's output through the stereo system and it sounds great to my ears.

This whole digression may be more apropos to the Audio Talk part of the forum, but it does relate to the issue at hand with these CD-Rs. Personally I don't think that I would have any issues at all with the audio quality of either MP3 downloads of this material or on-demand CD-Rs of the same. For me, the issue is more along the lines - as others have stated - of finding it hard to rationalize spending nearly as many (or in some cases more) $$ for a CD-R as for a regular CD.

And Dan's point about it being just as easy and just as cost-effective to use lossless rather than lossy formats to upload these babies is also noted.

When some geek can figure out a way to send the whole original vinyl album and artwork via com-pew-tor then I might be interested .

[.:.impossible]

I didn't know that FLAC files could be played directly ... for editing purposes, Goldwave "extracts" a FLAC file, presumably to WAV in order to do any editing, and I don't know of an audio player that automatically plays a FLAC file. One cool thing I noticed recently with NERO is that FLAC files are recognized as sources for audio CD burning. Saves me a step when I get around to burning my backlog of Dime shows.

From FLAC.soundforge.net.

[.:.impossible]

Man, I'm starting to think something is wrong with my ears...

[.:.impossible]

Seriously... the squeezebox sounds very good to me, regardless of file format. I have a modest stereo system. Nothing special, but I hear that folks that do spend $$$ on gear also agree. It seems to fit right into an audiophile set-up as well.

I stream high quality VBR, FLAC, WAV, and play from the actual CD itself to discern any differences in blind A/B tests with willing ears. The only time I can REALLY hear a difference is playing from the actual CD. Same with other folks. It is a different source, and it sounds different. Not better. Just sounds like a different source. I actually prefer the sound of the squeezebox to that of my CD player.

I also have plenty of emusic mp3s... generally music that I wouldn't have ever gone out of my way to find, and I have no qualms with the sound of those files either.

I don't know...

[Guest Bill Barton]

I didn't know that FLAC files could be played directly ... for editing purposes, Goldwave "extracts" a FLAC file, presumably to WAV in order to do any editing, and I don't know of an audio player that automatically plays a FLAC file. One cool thing I noticed recently with NERO is that FLAC files are recognized as sources for audio CD burning. Saves me a step when I get around to burning my backlog of Dime shows.

From FLAC.soundforge.net.

Thanks for that link!

[RDK]

Just to be clear: FLAC is a lossless compression format so it should sound identical to the original CDs or any wav files made from them.

[Claude]

I didn't know that FLAC files could be played directly

In fact, more and more people stop copying CDs or burning CD-Rs from lossless files, and play the files directly on the PC or a media server (Squeezebox, etc). Burning CD-Rs has become a waste of time and money. Better burn the FLAC files onto DVD-Rs (10-15 CDs on one DVD-R) or keep them on a hard drive (and make backups). It's much easier to organize and access.

The great thing about this is that one can use a regular PC as a source component together with a high quality DAC (digital/analogue converter), and it will sound as good as a high quality CD player. I actually prefer the PC over a Squeezebox for it's higher flexibility. I use Foobar2000, a remote control for the PC and the TV screen as a display.

That's why CD-R on demand services are really an anacronism. It's neither a collectible product, not is it as convenient as a download.

[A Lark Ascending]

I must admit all the FLAC and WAV stuff is right over my head (gave up physics to do history a thousand years ago!). I'm also enough of a dinosaur to burn downloads to CD-R and make pretty covers for them. So I'm not trying to play the great moderniser here.

My reasoning is not technical:

a) From 1970 to c. 2005 one of my great pleasures was going out buying records/CDs. Part of the pleasure was getting home and playing them straight away - Saturday was new recording day.

b) From around 2000 I discovered online CD buying - an unbelievable amount of music became possible. I didn't buy any more music...but I explored more widely (especially beyond the standard US/UK jazz in UK shops). The disadvantage was the unpredictable wait - hardly life threatening, but lost the 'buy and play on Saturday' joys.

c) The arrival of downloadable music (for me in the last 2 years) has coincided with the drying up of UK shops for specialist music, which has forced me almost fully onto online CD purchases. Downloads give me instant access - I'm not buying any more music...I am buying and playing when I want. Saturday is once again music buying and playing day.

Now I can see if you live close to a large US city the problem of accessing a good range of recordings might not be a problem. But I'm afraid in the UK that is not the case.

Of course none of that is of any importance to the fate of the recording industry. I just can't help feeling that a system that can produce very good quality recordings and distribute them without the issues of storing and physically moving them is likely to win in the end (so I very much agree that the Amazon CD-R service is a bit odd!).

Edited January 21, 2009 by Bev Stapleton

[Dan Gould]

I didn't know that FLAC files could be played directly ... for editing purposes, Goldwave "extracts" a FLAC file, presumably to WAV in order to do any editing, and I don't know of an audio player that automatically plays a FLAC file. One cool thing I noticed recently with NERO is that FLAC files are recognized as sources for audio CD burning. Saves me a step when I get around to burning my backlog of Dime shows.

Dan, immediately download this free software:

http://www.foobar2000.org/

Best audio player I have ever used!

I didn't know that FLAC files could be played directly

In fact, more and more people stop copying CDs or burning CD-Rs from lossless files, and play the files directly on the PC or a media server (Squeezebox, etc). Burning CD-Rs has become a waste of time and money. Better burn the FLAC files onto DVD-Rs (10-15 CDs on one DVD-R) or keep them on a hard drive (and make backups). It's much easier to organize and access.

The great thing about this is that one can use a regular PC as a source component together with a high quality DAC (digital/analogue converter), and it will sound as good as a high quality CD player. I actually prefer the PC over a Squeezebox for it's higher flexibility. I use Foobar2000, a remote control for the PC and the TV screen as a display.

That's why CD-R on demand services are really an anacronism. It's neither a collectible product, not is it as convenient as a download.

So if one doesn't play music on the PC, it isn't really necessary to download that media player. Or am I missing something?

[Shawn]

Dan, you are correct, if you don't use your computer as part of your stereo system you don't need the audio player.

I've been using my computer as a major component of my stereo since 2002 or so, I couldn't imagine it any other way at this point.

[hprill0]

3) CD-Rs don't "disintegrate". There is a slight chance that if one was subjected to high heat and bright light, the dye layer could fade, but the CD will never disintegrate.

4) I have several music and data CD-Rs that are over 13 years old. Not one has failed. I have never had a CD-R fail.

5) Pressed CDs will last much, much longer than 20 years. Where on earth did you come up that number? I have hundreds of CDs that are already well over 20 years old.

3) Ok, I'll succumb to your nitpicking. The CD-Rs don't disintegrate, but I've seen reflective layers in them disintegrate (holes, literally), and they certainly do fade over time, even though that time varies from manufacturer to manufacturer and depends on the materials used in the manufacturing process.

4) I have CD-Rs from as far back as 1989 that still work perfectly well. I also have had CD-Rs (notably from Ricoh and Sony) that failed after as little as six months, even though they were never exposed to heat or light. A friend of mine has lots of CD-Rs from Platinum that are failing now after about five years. Besides, if you had read my orginal post carefully, it said "can become unuseable", not "will become unuseable". In fact, I was giving them considerable leeway by saying "five years" rather than "six months".

5) The German national library in Berlin first noted in 1998 that the reflective layers in many mid-1980s audio CDs are showing an increasing number of pin-prick holes. The Austrian phonographic library has several CDs from the 1980s that have become unreadable. And no, these were not from the batch that was affected by "CD bronzing". CDs have only been on the market for 24 years. How do you know they last "much, much longer" than that? My professional experience with phonographic libraries certainly says otherwise.

Edited January 22, 2009 by hprill0

[hprill0]

There have been studies done that show that CD-Rs are not any more prone to read errors than regular pressed CDs.

There have also been studies done that show the opposite. The German magazine Stereo has just published an article to that effect in its 12/2008 issue. This is a moot point.

Edited January 22, 2009 by hprill0

[Kevin Bresnahan]

3) Ok, I'll succumb to your nitpicking. The CD-Rs don't disintegrate, but I've seen reflective layers in them disintegrate (holes, literally), and they certainly do fade over time, even though that time varies from manufacturer to manufacturer and depends on the materials used in the manufacturing process.

Post a picture of a CD-R where the reflective layer disintegrated. I've never heard of this happening nor seen one. If you have seen this, please take a picture and post it for us.

4) I have CD-Rs from as far back as 1989 that still work perfectly well. I also have had CD-Rs (notably from Ricoh and Sony) that failed after as little as six months, even though they were never exposed to heat or light. A friend of mine has lots of CD-Rs from Platinum that are failing now after about five years. Besides, if you had read my orginal post carefully, it said "can become unuseable", not "will become unuseable". In fact, I was giving them considerable leeway by saying "five years" rather than "six months".

If you read my original statement, I never said that CD-Rs cannot fail. I stated a fact that I have never had an audio CD-R fail.

Ricoh and Sony blanks were probably both manufactured at the same Taiwanese factory and are probably of poor quality. Don't let the name on the CD-R fool you. There are only about 5 plants making them. I would never buy CD-Rs from a company named "Platinum". Sounds like one of those cheapies they used to sell at CompUSA.

I still say that if you use well-made blanks, they are not likely to fail. Ever.

5) The German national library in Berlin first noted in 1998 that the reflective layers in many mid-1980s audio CDs are showing an increasing number of pin-prick holes. The Austrian phonographic library has several CDs from the 1980s that have become unreadable. And no, these were not from the batch that was affected by "CD bronzing". CDs have only been on the market for 24 years. How do you know they last "much, much longer" than that? My professional experience with phonographic libraries certainly says otherwise.

Ah, that German study again. I read that study myself. Note well, that it first appeared on a pro-vinyl website. Also note that it didn't have any "before" pictures, just "after" pictures. As I said above, I have never seen pin holes develop in any pressed CD. Yes, I have many CDs, particularly from the mid-80s, that have a lot of pin holes. They were there when I bought them.

As for the Austrian phonographic library's problems, send me a link. I'd like to read up on it. There have been a couple of instances where CD manufacturers in the early days used materials that deteriorated. It was mainly a few classical labels and the problems were well documented and mainly caused bronzing. If there is another problem out there, I'd like to read up on it.

Kevin

[Kevin Bresnahan]

There have been studies done that show that CD-Rs are not any more prone to read errors than regular pressed CDs.

There have also been studies done that show the opposite. The German magazine Stereo has just published an article to that effect in its 12/2008 issue. This is a moot point.

Is this the German magazine that has always proclaimed CDs to be inferior to their LP counterpart. Bias in journalism? Nah, can't happen.

[.:.impossible]

Whether or not CDRs fail, data storage is moving away from that trend.

[Claude]

There have been studies done that show that CD-Rs are not any more prone to read errors than regular pressed CDs.

There have also been studies done that show the opposite. The German magazine Stereo has just published an article to that effect in its 12/2008 issue. This is a moot point.

Is this the German magazine that has always proclaimed CDs to be inferior to their LP counterpart. Bias in journalism? Nah, can't happen.

You can't argue with that (with optimum playback equipment, LP is indeed superior to CD), but I agree with you that audio magzines have weird opinions on the effect of digital data transport/storage on sound quality. For them, everything affects the sound, be it the CD-R brand or the type of USB or ethernet cable.

The reason behind this that they want to support their advertisers selling "audiophile" data cables and CD-Rs.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

Whether or not CDRs fail, data storage is moving away from that trend.

This is certainly true.

Also, I can't recommend using DVD-Rs to back up data. I have yet to find a reliable DVD-R manufacturer.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

You can't argue with that (with optimum playback equipment, LP is indeed superior to CD),

Different thread Claude, and yes, I could certainly argue that point... but not in this thread. With all this CD-R discussion, we're already way off the track for this topic. No need to swing it off in another direction.

[Claude]

Also, I can't recommend using DVD-Rs to back up data. I have yet to find a reliable DVD-R manufacturer.

I have written a few hundred DVD+Rs (mostly cheap Memorex discs) since 2004, at a time when DVD storage was still cheaper than hard drive space. None of them has failed so far. Not a single one.

The reliability of burned DVDs depends not only on the discs, but also on the burner.

[hprill0]

Post a picture of a CD-R where the reflective layer disintegrated. I've never heard of this happening nor seen one. If you have seen this, please take a picture and post it for us.

Sorry, I've thrown them away. In case it happens again, I'll send you a photograph. Not that I'd really want it to happen again though.

Ricoh and Sony blanks were probably both manufactured at the same Taiwanese factory and are probably of poor quality.

Those used different dyes in the reflective layer; the Ricoh ones were gold (from around 1993), the Sony ones a greenish silver (from around 1999), but yeah, they were obviously of poor quality.

I would never buy CD-Rs from a company named "Platinum".

Neither would I; neither did I.

I still say that if you use well-made blanks, they are not likely to fail. Ever.

Well, duh. If you find blanks that won't ever fail, they won't ever fail. Can't contradict you on that one.

Ah, that German study again. I read that study myself. Note well, that it first appeared on a pro-vinyl website.

I don't know about any studies. I talked to the person in charge of the music department personally during a conference on long-term data preservation. He did not seem amused. The quality of some CDs from the mid-80s seems to have been less than perfect.

As for the Austrian phonographic library's problems, send me a link.

I have no link, just a colleague who works there. It's not a widespread problem, mind you, but some audio CDs have given up on them.

Is this the German magazine that has always proclaimed CDs to be inferior to their LP counterpart.

I don't know about that. It's the magazine that said that there are huge differences between CD-R manufacturers, and that some are significantly less durable and produce significantly more read errors than others. They also once did a 15-year longevity test that was passed only by one manufacturer. I do agree with Claude though, that much of what they write seems to be in some correlation with what ads are placed in the magazine.

Edited January 23, 2009 by hprill0

[Shawn]

Regarding the "pin holes" developing in pressed CDs, I have one. It was the original 1987 CD pressing of Metallica - Kill 'em All. I noticed at some point during the late 90's that it had some pinholes visible when I held it up to the light...looking at it again recently I noticed there were ALOT more of them. The disc hardly ever gets played, but the holes seem to have multiplied over the years.

The funny thing...it still plays all the way through with no skips.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

Regarding the "pin holes" developing in pressed CDs, I have one. It was the original 1987 CD pressing of Metallica - Kill 'em All. I noticed at some point during the late 90's that it had some pinholes visible when I held it up to the light...looking at it again recently I noticed there were ALOT more of them. The disc hardly ever gets played, but the holes seem to have multiplied over the years.

The funny thing...it still plays all the way through with no skips.

Interesting. That's a new one for the history books. Where was the CD made? By 1987, it was probably the US. I'll have to pull a few "Kill 'Em All" discs out of the used bins around the area and see if any of them show this.

[Shawn]

Regarding the "pin holes" developing in pressed CDs, I have one. It was the original 1987 CD pressing of Metallica - Kill 'em All. I noticed at some point during the late 90's that it had some pinholes visible when I held it up to the light...looking at it again recently I noticed there were ALOT more of them. The disc hardly ever gets played, but the holes seem to have multiplied over the years.

The funny thing...it still plays all the way through with no skips.

Interesting. That's a new one for the history books. Where was the CD made? By 1987, it was probably the US. I'll have to pull a few "Kill 'Em All" discs out of the used bins around the area and see if any of them show this.

It's the first US release (easy to tell because it has 2 bonus tracks not on later issues, Am I Evil and Blitzkrieg).

The catalog number is: 60766-2 - printed on the disc it says: Made in the U.S.A. by WEA Manufacturing Inc.

[Claude]

Amazon recently increased the prices of most of those CD-Rs. All the titles which were $14.98 are now $16.98.