CD Trimmer?

[pxc]

edit: I mean 4", not 8cm, CD-R blanks above.

 

[swiftB3]

Oh my, check out this amazing product, at only $399!

http://www.ultrasystem.com/usfeaturedQuantumPlug.html

Can you say "Liberating Excessive Cash from Idiots" if not, this product may be for you!!

[/COLOR]

Yeah, or as soon as the heroin takes effect.

Beat me to it. I guess it takes half an hour for the quantum particles in the room to line up correctly.

An audio CD only has to spin at a maximum of 500 RPM. 52x corresponds to a maximum RPM of 10,350 RPM. Big difference

Vibration isn't an issue anyway. If a CD can be read, even with error correction, it'll be played correctly. It's entirely possible to rip an audio CD at 52x speeds and get the same track CRCs you'd see at 1x -- the actual track CRCs.

Exactly. While analog might be better, the "audiophiles" who believe this crap don't truly understand digital. 1s and 0s. It either works or it skips. There are no "levels" of quality with digital. If your cd player lets the cd wobble enough to skip, and thus warrant "lathing", then you have a crap player and you need to get a new one.

 

[phide]

Impossible to explain, you have to hear it to believe it really, plus you have to be listening to vinyl. CD's just wont cut it. 44.1Khz audio is gonna sound like exactly that no matter what you play it through.

16/44.1 LPCM is actually superior to vinyl in every conceivable manner. You may not believe it, but given the physical characteristics of vinyl, and the tolerances observed whilst cutting vinyl, CD audio has greater resolution than a vinyl record despite the latter being analog. Whatever audio is present on a vinyl record can be duplicated precisely on an audio CD.

The major difference -- and as an "audio professor", he should know this -- is that vinyl records are typically mastered to different standards than audio CDs. Vinyl, as a physical recording medium, is not capable of recording as "hot" a master as an audio CD without severe distortion and other anomalies. Ergo, vinyl releases tend to be much less compressed than the audio CD counterparts, and less compression is universally accepted as being "better sounding".

Digital audio IS flat. There's no two ways around it.

The beauty of digital audio is that it's flat. It's capable of accurately representing anything you choose to record to it. If you want oodles of even-order harmonic distortion, digital audio can handle that. If you want the cleanest, flattest most pristine and uncolored sound possible, digital's got you covered. A vinyl record certainly has no edge when it comes to representing audio.

what could be a reason is the 16 bit resolution (aliasing).

Modern dithering algorithms like POWr can actually retain an effective 19 to 20 bits of resolution with a 16-bit word length. Frankly, though, the divide between 16-bit audio and 24-bit (or 32-bit) audio is, for all intents and purposes, a non-issue with the kind of loud masters we see so abundantly these days. It's important in the production phase, where low-amplitude phases may only be represented with half the available bits (or fewer in some cases), but not with loud music masters where bits are almost constantly "saturated".

 

[Jfkfhhfj]

What i don't get... you can get a real lathe for about 600$

 

[MrLonghair]

If you haven't tried building your own or listened to expensive 2.0/2.1 studio monitors already I recommend going out for a demonstration someplace. A few months ago I told a certain devteam that their cinematic trailer sounded like poorly EQ'd crap, they defended it until the end. I listened to it again on my my old Creative 2.1 kit later and I found out that this stuff often gets optimized for low quality speakers so it sounds more booming and impressive on them.

Long story short; Real speakers are worth it, don't bother with gold plated signature edition bullsh cables though!

 

[Methadras]

Wrong. Audiophiles are people who know and care about audio. I am greatly insulted in your lumping us together in with asshats who just have too much money.

People who buy Monster cables are not audiophiles, they're idiots who have more money than brains.

I know and care about audio. I know audiophiles. I know they care about audio as well. I almost became one. If you are that greatly insulted that you've been lumped together, then maybe you should have a talk with your fellow audiophiles and not promote the snakeoil that many of you (maybe not you) have bought into. That way your threshold for feeling insulted won't be so low.

 

[Devistater]

IF analog really sounds bettern then it's not related to the 44.1 khz range of a cd. 44.1 khz equals a frequency range of 22.05 khz and no adult hears higher frequencies than that. i am 28 and i can still hear 20 khz (which for many adults is not the case at that age), but it is so silent i wouldnt notice that sound.

Well but keep in mind that that the Nyquist rule is 2x samples MINIMUM for reproducing the sound.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist–Shannon_sampling_theorem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist_rate

So just because its 44 khz doesn't mean it perfectly reproduces sound at 22 khz

 

[devolutionist]

That's almost as good as Denon's $500 ethernet cable:

http://www.usa.denon.com/ProductDetails/3429.asp

 

[etherone]

Scientology much ...

people on drugs can see sounds, why can't the mentally unstable, hear a difference in paying 800 or 2 dollars

 

[daglesj]

Hopefully the dead-end economy will kill off a lot of these firms making such products.

Most of them are often just re-badged items used for other purposes with a 1000% mark up.

 

[Chiplg]

I'd like to watch the first guy that uses this on a CD-R.