Are there any concerns regarding GigaRec?

vbimport

#1

How about data durability? Error rate? Are there any other negative effects than incompatibility with maybe some reading devices when pressing more data on the disc?


#2

You can scan for C1/C2 errors yourself.
The durability will probably be shorter, because the data should be more difficult to read, but if you get good C1/C2 scans, the impact on durability might be negligible. But who knows for sure… :wink:

I doubt that anybody has burnt a CD with gigarec ten years ago and can do a scan now. :bigsmile:


#3

FYI, with GigaRec you can even burn LESS data on the disc (GigaRec 0.6x, 0.7x, 0.8x). Maybe you’ve heard about Yamaha’s Audio Master technology (which corresponds to 0.85x).
I see that you are talking a lot about jitter in another thread, so maybe this could be interesting stuff for you. :wink:

Regards,

ET



#4

Giga rec changes the linear velicity when writing.A normal 650MB disc has a linear velocity of 1.2m/s. Gigarec can slow down (giving you more space on the disc) or speed up (giving you less space) this linear velocity.


#5

@eltranquil: Thanks for the Yamaha document, it is VERY interesting, though I am convinced that they don’t tell the truth:

"Audio CDs burned using conventional methods display considerably higher jitter values (audible playback errors) than pressed CDs. "

I recently compared the jitter which was measured by Plextools/PX-716A on several commercial cds and their copies, created WITHOUT GigaRec, and the copies were all burnt on a different recorder (not the Plextor). The Jitter of the original CDs was in all cases higher, approximately about twice as high as those of the copies.

I already expected this result because for me it is hard to believe that a cd produced by a mechanical process (stamp) would be as exact as a individually burned cd.

Nevertheless, the document confirms that the absolute level of jitter would decrease when using GigaRec in the “wrong” direction (I actually already knew about this option, thanks anyway :wink: )


#6

How did you do this using PlexTools?

PlexTools only shows you a jitter graph with relative values - the entire graph is shifted up or down depending on the jitter values scanned.

If you were using PxScan/PxView to perform the jitter scans I could understand how you can compare jitter between discs, since you can see the absolute jitter values in the graph, but using PlexTools you don’t see the absolute values!? :confused:


#7

Well, maybe the absolute position of the graph is not relevant, but you can interpret the amplitude (minimum to maximum) over the whole graph as a measure for the jitter influence. Isn’t it?
Actually I’m really not so sure about how to interpret the graphs, so far I’ve not found any good documentation about it.


#8

Higher density may lead to higher error rate.But capability become higher,too.


#9

Ok, I read the comments from the help function again. Plextools seems to display absolute jitter values from 3T~11T (whatever that means?!) but the ordinate is labeled ‘low’ and ‘high’. So I would expect, a better result concerning jitter is given if the graph is as low as possible.

For the beta value, a constant value is best. Beginning at 0, the graph shows fluctuations to positive and negative values.