25 Apr
2010
25 Apr
'10
7:41 a.m.
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 03:52:16PM -0700, Ken Restivo wrote:
Awesome. This is why I love the Internet :-)
Makes sense: at slower speeds, the laser could burn a hole in the media. So at slowest
possible speed, I should get the deepest possible pits, and thus the most reliable-to-read
CD, I guess.
It seems that the material needs a certain time to change its
properties. Using faster speed but more laser power should give the same
result, but sometimes is not exactly equivalent (like cooking food with
much higher temperature but less time or something like that XD ), and
probably the same can be said when using slow than optimal speeds, I
guess.
Many people everywhere recommends using very slow speeds, but I must say
that personally I never noticed significant improvements with any speed.
Some drives perform much better that other when extracting data. In
practice is very difficult to get perfect tracks from audio cd, though
tools like cdparanoia do a nice job.
Digital media that can degrade the sound when dust or fingerprints are
present is a nice emulation of analog media when feeling nostalgic ;)
Today I just tend to write data CD or usb memories with flac files
inside.