Hi Mike,
Gun barrels are a one piece item (you hope !!).
With CD players, the servo sections are at least on their own regulator (at minimum). Some have a winding just for the servos.
And yes! Here's Johnny!
Bored? Got some CD's ?
-Chris
Gun barrels are a one piece item (you hope !!).
With CD players, the servo sections are at least on their own regulator (at minimum). Some have a winding just for the servos.
Yup, some of them are pretty cheap. The rotating mass will not vary that quickly. Imagine what would happen as the disc motor switched from pole to pole otherwise!
And yes! Here's Johnny!
Bored? Got some CD's ?
-Chris
While it may sound reasonable, I certainly would have a problem with the explanation.serengetiplains said:
Spot sizes in the 800 nanometer range, to be missed, require tracking errors consistent with that size. Below the resonance of the cd, that level of vibration does not exist. I would expect actual measurements and data...what is the new modulus, what is the Q, how was it measured?.. If all they did was talk, then it is most likely, just made up floob.
serengetiplains said:
Then data supporting supply noise vs datastream errors would be the most viable evidence of such an effect. Do they support this assertion with data?
What vibrational mode are they suggesting?? Vertical won't do it, so they are speculating radial. Radial vibe at the 800 nm level would probably destroy the cd transport.. I also believe the tracking mechanics cannot follow vibe motion at the frequencies a cd would resonate at radially. Meaning, no supply noise beyond normal.
Cheers, John
serengetiplains said:
Bill Perkins was the worker bee on the ground during those days (and his CryoVac process & knowledge of cyro evolved from those experiences). The better the CD player the less effect the cyro process had on the sound quality which jives....
Poobah -- you have far too simplistic a view of what happens in a CD player, one could easily extend your arguement to say that all CD transports sound the same...
dave
jneutron said:
Not hard data, but indicative. When i ripped my CD collection to the hard drive (with read as many times as needed until no errors), most CDs were taking 2-3x to get all the data many much more. Since a CD-player doesn't have this much time to spare, any player will rarely get all the information off all the disks.
dave
serengetiplains said:
Ah. Was any supporting data provided? Jitter is used so much, it can be a cool buzzword.
Is he talking about picosecond, nanosecond, microsecond.. jitter sufficient to cause disruption of the data stream?
Honestly, If I were to look for something, I'd look at the reflectivity difference between the spots and holes, therefore, the actual analog signal from the detector mechanism.
If any delam, even at the 50 nanometer level, were occurring, that would affect the analog detector signal.
If the process somehow re-lam'd the data, I'd also expect that.
If the levels and transitions are not affected, nothing is happening.
If the transport were being overworked, or worked any different, that would easily be seen via measurement of the tracking position error signal.
But I have considerable doubts as the the viability of the stated reasoning.
Cheers, John
planet10 said:
I have problems with ripping cd's.
My cd reader is 48 speed. Some of my cd's vibrate to beat the band at that speed, but the comp still gets the data...I'm confident that it is probably goin back and forth many times to get a good read of the data. Some of the cd's will take an hour to get one track (yah, I waited...what a PITA), and some will not even finish one track. I wish I could drop the darn thing to 1 or 4 or 8 speed, but my software doesn't seem to have that option (well, I haven't found it yet).
I suspect the ink as the culprit for the worst offenders...I think they are too imbalanced for 48 speed...they work just fine in my cd players.
A normal speed player most likely won't have this problem.
It is simple to compare bitstreams however... So, if I were selling a process that sounds better, and found that comparison of bitstreams did indeed show my process in a good light, I'd be beatin a very big drum..
Not seeing anything which shows this, I would suspect the explanation as unsupported.
Cheers, John
Jitter... does not come from the data on the disc! Jitter comes from the clock that strobes the reconstructed word stream.
The data from the disc goes into a deep pipeline for de-interlacing, error detection/correction etc...
The data on a CD is not stored in a simple serial-access fashion as it is on a vinyl disc.
I'll go along with:
* jitter on DAC clock
* linearity errors on the DAC
* cheesey/cheap oversampling algorithms
* poor vibration decoupling on the transport
* etc...
You don't need data to rationally understand how these things WILL impact output.
But frozen discs... no... not without a plausible explanation; and comparisions of data streams.
What people seems to missing here regarding data is this: once the system is built well enough to reliably spit out the number 0x8f7d for sample number 5,395,364; you're there. One guy's 0x8f7d is not better, or worse, than some other guys cryo'd 0x8f7d.
It is just silly... just plain silly.
The data from the disc goes into a deep pipeline for de-interlacing, error detection/correction etc...
The data on a CD is not stored in a simple serial-access fashion as it is on a vinyl disc.
I'll go along with:
* jitter on DAC clock
* linearity errors on the DAC
* cheesey/cheap oversampling algorithms
* poor vibration decoupling on the transport
* etc...
You don't need data to rationally understand how these things WILL impact output.
But frozen discs... no... not without a plausible explanation; and comparisions of data streams.
What people seems to missing here regarding data is this: once the system is built well enough to reliably spit out the number 0x8f7d for sample number 5,395,364; you're there. One guy's 0x8f7d is not better, or worse, than some other guys cryo'd 0x8f7d.
It is just silly... just plain silly.
jneutron...
It could also be the drive....
I recently got a pioneer DVD-writer. I also have a Sony CDR-w and a sony DVD rom (both liteon I belive)...
Anyway I noticed although the pioneer is rated slightly slower than the sony for CD it would read quicker and load programs quicker etc.
I did a few quality tests on audio CD's and both sony's could not hold a higher average speed then the pioneer. The Sony drives also had a number of errors (quite large amounts of errors actually). However, the pioneer maintaing good avg speed and no errors at all.
Worth I think making sure you have good PC drives in my experience. I think Pioneer are good, TEAC drives are also supposed to be good (and not sure but heard good things about NEC ones) when there is so little diffrence in cost it makes sence (certainly now I have observed it myself.
Anyway my post is kinda off topic so I'll leave it at that, It's just an observation I made.
John
It could also be the drive....
I recently got a pioneer DVD-writer. I also have a Sony CDR-w and a sony DVD rom (both liteon I belive)...
Anyway I noticed although the pioneer is rated slightly slower than the sony for CD it would read quicker and load programs quicker etc.
I did a few quality tests on audio CD's and both sony's could not hold a higher average speed then the pioneer. The Sony drives also had a number of errors (quite large amounts of errors actually). However, the pioneer maintaing good avg speed and no errors at all.
Worth I think making sure you have good PC drives in my experience. I think Pioneer are good, TEAC drives are also supposed to be good (and not sure but heard good things about NEC ones) when there is so little diffrence in cost it makes sence (certainly now I have observed it myself.
Anyway my post is kinda off topic so I'll leave it at that, It's just an observation I made.
John
I did some googling and found this:
http://www.300below.com/site/video/
What if any component were cooled in extremely small increments right upto -300 and then very gradually brought back to room temperature. Would Thermal Shock be eliminated ?
I read somewhere that the treatment does the following:
In all matter carbon exists. There are two types of molecule, austenite and martensite. The austenitic state is very random in structure and the freezing process converts this austinite into martensitic carbon which has a honeycomb appearance and is completely homogenized. Its a once only treatment and cannot be destroyed or reduced in its effect by age, heat, wear etc.
Is this science or fiction or a mixture of both ?
http://www.300below.com/site/video/
What if any component were cooled in extremely small increments right upto -300 and then very gradually brought back to room temperature. Would Thermal Shock be eliminated ?
I read somewhere that the treatment does the following:
In all matter carbon exists. There are two types of molecule, austenite and martensite. The austenitic state is very random in structure and the freezing process converts this austinite into martensitic carbon which has a honeycomb appearance and is completely homogenized. Its a once only treatment and cannot be destroyed or reduced in its effect by age, heat, wear etc.
Is this science or fiction or a mixture of both ?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.