Gary B wrote:

I currently use my pc to copy the occasional cd borrowed from friends/ the
library - using the cd burner on my pc.
However, it's suddenly occurred to me that there must be a reason why
people invest in a dedicated digital recorder like the Sony rcd w3 (c £200
- what hi fi 5 star review..)?

So - I assume its because it produces copies that sound much better than
what I produce using my £40 cd burner at present? - or am I missing
something? Advice appreciated

If you just want to copy CDs then it will be no better than using a
computer. OTOH if you want to copy analogue sources onto CD (like vinyl for
example) then they are far superior to the average sound card in a PC.

Ian

"Chris Isbell" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:08:17 -0000, "Gary B"
wrote:

So - I assume its because it produces copies that sound much better than
what I produce using my £40 cd burner at present? - or am I missing
something? Advice appreciated

It's digital! Unless there is a fault or incompatibility all copies
will be identical to the original regardless of the price of the
duplicating equipment.


--
Chris Isbell
Southampton
UK

They're not, funnily enough. Well, they may well be identical but they sound
different. I have a NAD 660 and the copies often vary in length (only a
couple of seconds), and every so often there's a glitch between continuous
tracks (such as live albums, DSOM etc) when using the direct dub. According
to the many reviews I read before buying, the NAD is pretty good. This is
the reason given to me by the NAD people:
----------
Sorry there is no cure for the problem, and it is normal on the C660 as with
many other makes and models I am told.

The Bit copy is making a perfect duplicate - it is the track information
that is causing the "Glitch" to appear in the copy.

--------------

"Chris Isbell" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:08:17 -0000, "Gary B"
wrote:

So - I assume its because it produces copies that sound much better than
what I produce using my £40 cd burner at present? - or am I missing
something? Advice appreciated

It's digital! Unless there is a fault or incompatibility all copies
will be identical to the original regardless of the price of the
duplicating equipment.


--
Chris Isbell
Southampton
UK

They're not, funnily enough. Well, they may well be identical but they sound
different. I have a NAD 660 and the copies often vary in length (only a
couple of seconds), and every so often there's a glitch between continuous
tracks (such as live albums, DSOM etc) when using the direct dub. According
to the many reviews I read before buying, the NAD is pretty good. This is
the reason given to me by the NAD people:
----------
Sorry there is no cure for the problem, and it is normal on the C660 as with
many other makes and models I am told.

The Bit copy is making a perfect duplicate - it is the track information
that is causing the "Glitch" to appear in the copy.

--------------

On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 22:27:18 -0000, RJH
wrote:

It's digital! Unless there is a fault or incompatibility all copies
will be identical to the original regardless of the price of the
duplicating equipment.

They're not, funnily enough. Well, they may well be identical but they
sound different.

Then surely they are not identical?

I have a NAD 660 and the copies often vary in length (only a
couple of seconds), and every so often there's a glitch between
continuous
tracks (such as live albums, DSOM etc) when using the direct dub.
According
to the many reviews I read before buying, the NAD is pretty good. This is
the reason given to me by the NAD people:
----------
Sorry there is no cure for the problem, and it is normal on the C660 as
with
many other makes and models I am told.

The Bit copy is making a perfect duplicate - it is the track information
that is causing the "Glitch" to appear in the copy.
--------------

Sounds very much like a design fault to me. No (non broken) £40 PC drive
would do this.
A perfect copy should include a perfect copy of the track information as
well as the music.

--
Jim H jh
@333
.org

On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 22:27:18 -0000, RJH
wrote:

It's digital! Unless there is a fault or incompatibility all copies
will be identical to the original regardless of the price of the
duplicating equipment.

They're not, funnily enough. Well, they may well be identical but they
sound different.

Then surely they are not identical?

I have a NAD 660 and the copies often vary in length (only a
couple of seconds), and every so often there's a glitch between
continuous
tracks (such as live albums, DSOM etc) when using the direct dub.
According
to the many reviews I read before buying, the NAD is pretty good. This is
the reason given to me by the NAD people:
----------
Sorry there is no cure for the problem, and it is normal on the C660 as
with
many other makes and models I am told.

The Bit copy is making a perfect duplicate - it is the track information
that is causing the "Glitch" to appear in the copy.
--------------

Sounds very much like a design fault to me. No (non broken) £40 PC drive
would do this.
A perfect copy should include a perfect copy of the track information as
well as the music.

--
Jim H jh
@333
.org

Hi,

In message , RJH
writes

They're not, funnily enough. Well, they may well be identical but they sound
different. I have a NAD 660 and the copies often vary in length (only a
couple of seconds), and every so often there's a glitch between continuous
tracks (such as live albums, DSOM etc) when using the direct dub. According
to the many reviews I read before buying, the NAD is pretty good. This is
the reason given to me by the NAD people:

This is a guess, but the NAD is probably copying 'track at once' rather
than 'disc at once'. It may be inserting small breaks between tracks
that shouldn't be there. I've had this issue copying live CDs in track
at once mode, where some software would insert a default break in
between tracks. Switching to disc at once mode solved the problem.

----------
Sorry there is no cure for the problem, and it is normal on the C660 as with
many other makes and models I am told.

The Bit copy is making a perfect duplicate - it is the track information
that is causing the "Glitch" to appear in the copy.

It may be making a perfect duplicate of each track, but it obviously
isn't making a perfect duplicate of the entire disc.


--
Glenn Booth

Hi,

In message , RJH
writes

They're not, funnily enough. Well, they may well be identical but they sound
different. I have a NAD 660 and the copies often vary in length (only a
couple of seconds), and every so often there's a glitch between continuous
tracks (such as live albums, DSOM etc) when using the direct dub. According
to the many reviews I read before buying, the NAD is pretty good. This is
the reason given to me by the NAD people:

This is a guess, but the NAD is probably copying 'track at once' rather
than 'disc at once'. It may be inserting small breaks between tracks
that shouldn't be there. I've had this issue copying live CDs in track
at once mode, where some software would insert a default break in
between tracks. Switching to disc at once mode solved the problem.

----------
Sorry there is no cure for the problem, and it is normal on the C660 as with
many other makes and models I am told.

The Bit copy is making a perfect duplicate - it is the track information
that is causing the "Glitch" to appear in the copy.

It may be making a perfect duplicate of each track, but it obviously
isn't making a perfect duplicate of the entire disc.


--
Glenn Booth

In article , RJH
wrote:

"Chris Isbell" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:08:17 -0000, "Gary B"
wrote:

So - I assume its because it produces copies that sound much better
than what I produce using my £40 cd burner at present? - or am I
missing something? Advice appreciated

It's digital! Unless there is a fault or incompatibility all copies
will be identical to the original regardless of the price of the
duplicating equipment.


-- Chris Isbell Southampton UK

They're not, funnily enough. Well, they may well be identical but they
sound different. I have a NAD 660 and the copies often vary in length
(only a couple of seconds), and every so often there's a glitch between
continuous tracks (such as live albums, DSOM etc) when using the direct
dub.

I have a Pioneer Audio CDR/W recorder. I use it mostly for recording
concerts from BBC R3 and for transferring my old tapes, etc, onto CDR.

However when I first had it I did some experiments, making some digital
copies via S/PDIF from another transport (Meridian 263). When I listen I
can't tell the difference[1]. When I load the results onto my computer and
do a sample-for-sample comparison, they come out identical.

I don't seem to have encountered the 'glitch' problem you describe. However
this may be a mis-feature of some recorders, I suppose. Perhaps akin to
'track at once' as opposed to 'disc at once' recording.

[1] Some brands of CDR do not play reliably on my old Meridian transport,
and these can then sound different. However in these cases the copy sounded
just like the orginal if played on the recorder as a transport, and using
the meridan DAC for the output.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , RJH
wrote:

"Chris Isbell" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:08:17 -0000, "Gary B"
wrote:

So - I assume its because it produces copies that sound much better
than what I produce using my £40 cd burner at present? - or am I
missing something? Advice appreciated

It's digital! Unless there is a fault or incompatibility all copies
will be identical to the original regardless of the price of the
duplicating equipment.


-- Chris Isbell Southampton UK

They're not, funnily enough. Well, they may well be identical but they
sound different. I have a NAD 660 and the copies often vary in length
(only a couple of seconds), and every so often there's a glitch between
continuous tracks (such as live albums, DSOM etc) when using the direct
dub.

I have a Pioneer Audio CDR/W recorder. I use it mostly for recording
concerts from BBC R3 and for transferring my old tapes, etc, onto CDR.

However when I first had it I did some experiments, making some digital
copies via S/PDIF from another transport (Meridian 263). When I listen I
can't tell the difference[1]. When I load the results onto my computer and
do a sample-for-sample comparison, they come out identical.

I don't seem to have encountered the 'glitch' problem you describe. However
this may be a mis-feature of some recorders, I suppose. Perhaps akin to
'track at once' as opposed to 'disc at once' recording.

[1] Some brands of CDR do not play reliably on my old Meridian transport,
and these can then sound different. However in these cases the copy sounded
just like the orginal if played on the recorder as a transport, and using
the meridan DAC for the output.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , RJH
wrote:

"Chris Isbell" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:08:17 -0000, "Gary B"
wrote:

So - I assume its because it produces copies that sound much better
than what I produce using my £40 cd burner at present? - or am I
missing something? Advice appreciated

It's digital! Unless there is a fault or incompatibility all copies
will be identical to the original regardless of the price of the
duplicating equipment.


-- Chris Isbell Southampton UK

They're not, funnily enough. Well, they may well be identical but they
sound different. I have a NAD 660 and the copies often vary in length
(only a couple of seconds), and every so often there's a glitch between
continuous tracks (such as live albums, DSOM etc) when using the direct
dub.

I have a Pioneer Audio CDR/W recorder. I use it mostly for recording
concerts from BBC R3 and for transferring my old tapes, etc, onto CDR.

However when I first had it I did some experiments, making some digital
copies via S/PDIF from another transport (Meridian 263). When I listen I
can't tell the difference[1]. When I load the results onto my computer and
do a sample-for-sample comparison, they come out identical.

That's interesting - because my copies are not identical, although I'm not
sure how to do a bit for bit comparison. The amount of space used on the
disk, and track sizes differ very slightly.

I don't seem to have encountered the 'glitch' problem you describe.
However
this may be a mis-feature of some recorders, I suppose. Perhaps akin to
'track at once' as opposed to 'disc at once' recording.

It's a tiny, fraction of a second 'blip', just as the tracks cross over.
Could well be a TAO 'undocumented feature'.

Rob

[1] Some brands of CDR do not play reliably on my old Meridian transport,
and these can then sound different. However in these cases the copy
sounded
just like the orginal if played on the recorder as a transport, and using
the meridan DAC for the output.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics
http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html