Different organic dye different timbre?

vbimport

#1

I heared someone said a characteristic of CD-R: different organic dye have different timbre(in audio format), like AZO and cyanine CD-R have better sound than phthalocyanine CD-R. I want a exact explanation about it. :bow:

Who can show me some articles about this to reference. :slight_smile:

many thanks. :wink:


#2

I don’t think this is really true.
The only reason I can think of is that AZO and Cyanine discs are nowadays only made by a few high-quality, specialized companies (Mitsubishi, Taiyo Yuden, and one or two smaller companies…), while Phthalocyanine is everywhere (Ritek, CMC, Prodisc, …).

It wasn’t like that a few years ago. At that time, Cyanine was the dye which could be found everywhere, the Taiwanese mass producers all used it, but Cyanine is a dye which must be prepared with great care and stability additives (unlike P-Cyanine), so it got its (unjust) bad reputation.

There was a green marker myth once (green marker used on CDs would improve audio quality)… :slight_smile:


#3

That’s a pure audiophile myth, based on ignorance of how digital audio is handled, and on downright magical thinking. I’d bet that many who spread such ideas don’t even know what [I]timbre[/I] actually is.
And like with anything in the audio field, when people have [I]decided[/I] to hear something, they [I]do[/I] hear it… as long as they have identified the source prior to listening! Cut them off from the info, and play the sources blind, they can’t hear the difference anymore. That’s the way it is. :rolleyes:

I’m a professional sound engineer and a musician, I think I have pretty good ears, sometimes very high jitter (>16%) on audio CDRs played in older CDR players slightly bug me, but that’s about all. I’ve tested extensively these so-called audible differences between blanks, and I’m totally convinced that this is ultimate rubbish. Assuming of course that the burns are technically all good. Bad audio burns (C2, extremely high jitter…) can be audible. Lots of C2 are definitly easily audible even by the most untrained ears.

The audiophile world is full of myths, half of what you read is [I]unsound[/I]. ( :stuck_out_tongue: lol) - don’t get fooled, even less so since there are many aspects of audio that are far more important than these schoolyard stories, like having a pair of excellent loudspeakers for example. Focus on the important things, leave the rest to those who like to focus on fantasy. :bigsmile:

Mmmmh… I like your theory on the origin of the myth, [B]kg_evilboy[/B]. Makes sense at least. :slight_smile:


#4

Sound reasons to consider this as a myth:
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=372494&postcount=3
and to be fair, a source contradicting my input, recommending black CDRs:

Make your own mind with your own ears.


#5

For your convenience,
A direct link to the white paper about black CDRs
(I don’t buy it, but as I mention above, make your own opinion).


#6

If “digitally identical” copies do sound different, then you have to question how the audiophile CD deck is making such a hash of something that should be possible to do with absolute digital precision.

After all, if it is read without any error concealment needed, it should be 100%, otherwise you are actualy judging the damage being concealed, rather than the actual quality. Only other thing, a player may have timing issues, where a digital copy does not.