×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sony Blu-spec CD Format Detailed, Hits Stores

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the this-year's-jumprope dept.

Media 290

CNETNate writes "More details about Sony's new Blu-spec CD format — standard CDs authored using Blu-ray's blue diode technology — are beginning to emerge, with commercial releases beginning to hit Amazon. Blu-spec CDs are compatible with existing CD players but have been mastered with higher levels of accuracy by using the same technology used to author Blu-ray discs, with the intention of eliminating reading errors that occur as a result of being authored with traditional red laser technology. Sony has also launched an official (Japanese) site for Blu-spec CDs."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

290 comments

first posttt (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27003417)

first posttt

I'm unimpressed. (5, Insightful)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003445)

This reminds me of the gold plated cables "to ensure the digital signal has the highest fidelity".

This looks like snake oil marketed to the "I'm a pretend audiophile who loves buying more expensive things with questionable benefits" crowd.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (5, Insightful)

LUH 3418 (1429407) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003489)

I feel the same way. I never ever had problems with defective audio CDs, or none that my non-audiophile ears could detect anyways! Furthermore, aren't audio CD sales constantly dropping? Do we really need more odd physical media formats?

Re:I'm unimpressed. (5, Informative)

SCPRedMage (838040) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004239)

This isn't actually a new "physical media format". It's just a CD made with a blue laser instead of a red laser. They're still readable by any old CD player; the only difference is that they supposedly have a lower error rate.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004283)

I never thought that I had problems with my CDs (some of which are 25 years old) until I ripped them all using "grip" with cdparanoia turned on. A small number of the CDs ripped at very slow speeds (sometimes less than 1X), which I assume was the result of cdparanoia doing multiple read passes to try to compensate for errors.

However, since standard CD players have logic to hide small errors, I never heard any problems with them anyway. Maybe audiophiles disagree. IMO, probably the main benefit from this technology would be avoiding slow ripping times, which doesn't seem worth much to me.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (2, Insightful)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004333)

After reading the article, it seems that this in theory would reduce the amount of 'innate' errors in the master. This would imply that, with fewer errors, your CD could get slightly more scratched before it starts to skip/distort/bug out noticeably.

However, as many others have said, this is solving a problem no one seems to have. You aren't getting better quality audio, you are just reducing the already low error rate of the master.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (0, Offtopic)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003495)

Not to mention why should people care to replace the standard CD players that have functioned for years? If this format doesn't work for them, this is not going to take off anywhere. I sure as hell am not jumping to blu ray just to play existing cds and dvds.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (5, Informative)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003527)

Read the summary again. This isn't blu-ray, it's just using a blue laser to regular burn CDs instead of a red one.

It's solving a problem nobody has.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1, Insightful)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003559)

I thought I misread it there, thank you for confirming.

I completely agree with your second statement.

What is the purpose, to charge more per CD? Is it me, or does this seem to be a way to try to avoid the price fixing scandals involving existing cd prices?

Re:I'm unimpressed. (2, Interesting)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003729)

The stated reason is more accurate CDs, but I think you've got it.

I mean, I don't know about you, but I've never had a problem with CDs being unreadable from the store(though some hack-job magazine CDs didn't last very long). I've been using CDs for at least 15 years. What problem is this technology solving?

I hadn't think about the price fixing scandals, but maybe. Perhaps we'll see regular CDs drop to 8 bucks, and these new (identical) cds priced at 20-30 bucks.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004011)

Perhaps we'll see regular CDs drop to 8 bucks, and these new (identical) cds priced at 20-30 bucks.
No, you'll see these new cds priced at $20-30 and they won't make the older ones anymore.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (3, Interesting)

Clarious (1177725) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004019)

If i'm not wrong, Audio CD are error tolerant, they was designed to play without being interrupted by ignoring minor errors while reading. Because everyone will be more angry if their CD is skipping like crazy than having little distortion in the sound. That is why programs like EAC exist, they can check if the reader are bypassing errors or not so a (near) perfect copy of the audio data on the CD can be created.

I keep my CDs carefully and I don't have a great ear so I can't say that my CDs give different sound over years. But there are a lot of audiophiles around, and when they want to create a lossless copy of the CD, everything has to be 'lossless', from the source to the encoding.

But IMO, this technology is useless as some other ones from Sony.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (0, Redundant)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004079)

I don't know about you, but neither my Windows CD nor my linux CD have any problems reading with lossless precision.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

Clarious (1177725) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004155)

How do you verify that? After finishing reading Audio CD (which take a looong time), EAC can check if it is accurate or not by comparing its checksums with another people's one.

Oh, and I am talking about Audio CD, not the one with data :)

Re:I'm unimpressed. (0)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004171)

I verify it by the fact that Windows and linux boot.

There's no difference between the audio CD and the one with data. That's the point of an audio CD.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

Clarious (1177725) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004267)

Oh no, they are different.

Data is often put in one track of a CD with extra information to check for error. If your reader meets an error while reading the data from CD, it will have to re-read it again, but they can't do it while playing audio CD, as it will cause skips and glitches. And while you can read data on CD at high speed (52x), your CD driver only read audio CD at 1x, just enough for playing and not enough time for re-read the errors parts.

For more information you can check Exact Audio Copy document, as I am not an expert at this.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (0, Offtopic)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004453)

You appear mistaken. [wikipedia.org] Part of the redbook audio CD standard is error correction in a mathematical sense(correct digital values, not just reasonable degradation).

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

mrfaithful (1212510) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004199)

Different encoding scheme, more error correction and most importantly the data has a way to tell the drive where it is for accurate seeking, so a misread can be re-read. Whereas on an audio-cd programs have to do a hack where they guess the position based on the data they are receiving. Accurate rip software can basically never truly guarantee a bit for bit copy, and have to brute force it to get close. In practice however the end result is close enough that only a purist who doesn't care about the music so much as the warm fuzzy feeling of a accuracy will care.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004265)

I need a source on this. As far as I've ever been told, digital data is digital data.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

ameyer17 (935373) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004153)

But IMO, this technology is useless as some other ones from Sony.

Reminds me of the pseusoscience marketing bullshit they use for things like gold cds.

However, it wouldn't surprise me if these new CDs sound better, but the blue laser won't have anything to do with it. It'll have to do with higher quality mastering (such as not compressing and clipping the music within inches of its life).

Re:I'm unimpressed. (2, Interesting)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004237)

Gold would actually make sense for a CD you wanted to last indefinitely, because gold is extremely non-reactive, and wouldn't oxidize.

That said, it's only one half of the equation. the plastic part of the CD would have to be replaced with something with a long life, because it doesn't matter if your data is there if you can't see it anymore.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004347)

"lossless copy of the CD"

the irony is rich today~

It's an improvement in the manufacturing process.
That is all. There product will now be more accurate. Does that matter to the user of Music CD's at this time? no.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

Cynonamous Anoward (994767) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004329)

Actually, what this looks like is a blue laser burner for CD/DVD compatible R/RW discs. FYI, CD's bought in a store are not written with lasers, so discs bought in a store are irrelevant to this discussion. The problem is the inaccuracies of BURNING a CD-R/RW (i.e. you burning it yourself with a drive in your computer).

Therefore this actually is a big deal, because it could mean the ability to burn (at home in your computer) a backward compatible music CD, at higher speeds with less failure rate.

This is even more important for Mastering houses. A mastering house will use a laser burner to write the final master CD. That CD is then sent to a reproduction house, which uses a machine to read the data and cut a permanent bit pattern into a glass disc. Blank Plastic discs are then pressed into the glass to form the pits for the data on disc. this process has an extremely low failure rate (why you rarely get bad discs from the store).

HOWEVER, if the mastering house burns a master with errors in it, and nobody notices (i.e. a bit is halfway burned, and sometimes it plays, some times it doesn't. happened to me 3 days ago), then the cutting reader might mis-read the master. Next thing you know, that error gets replicated into the glass disc, and usually into a few thousand store copies, before it is noticed. Thus ensues a recall and a reprint, at the expense of the musician. Sucko.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

neomunk (913773) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004373)

This tech, like those multi-thousand dollar cat5 cables you can find on the internet, makes your ones 'oneier' and your zeros 'zeroier'. Duh.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

bugs2squash (1132591) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004149)

you misread it because it was written using a red laser. If it had been written using a blue laser you would have read it just fine.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004335)

At this point I'm just grateful that people read my own replies as opposed to how I misread everything, and so I've gotten plenty of "you misread" posts but not to a malicious extreme. People can be pretty damn vicious if you make a statement, are totally in the wrong, and don't notice that you're talking out your ass in 10secs. I mean I posted a reply in what, 4 minutes?

There are like 5 direct and 17 or so total replies already.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

Estanislao Martnez (203477) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004325)

What is the purpose, to charge more per CD?

Actually, this sort of thing would most likely make CDs and Blu-Ray disks cheaper to press. If the same machines can press either of them, that allows for economies of scale that aren't possible with different machines for each.

Not that I expect CDs to actually become cheaper because of this, of course.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27003619)

But it's still nifty to reuse hardware for more and more things.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (4, Funny)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003675)

You can use high intensity laser diodes in engines instead of spark plugs. Sure, it's more expensive and doesn't have any benefit, but it's NEWER!

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

qoncept (599709) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003853)

The ones that are failing at an ridiculous rate? And they're going to be used to write media that no one uses (or at least ought not to use) anymore? "problem no one has" -- couldn't have said it better.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (4, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003895)

It's attempting to solve a very serious problem ... Sony's not making enough damn money.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

EvanED (569694) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004029)

It's solving a problem nobody has.

I have had several CD players that got a bit long-in-the-tooth and now have problems with reading some, but not all, CDs. The CDs tend to not be scratched, and will read fine in newer or better players. I don't know if this would help with this problem, but it might. And if it did, I would rather appreciate that, as it would extend the useful life of CD players.

Of course, they're about 5 or 10 years too late to be of much use.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004147)

It would only be cost effective if the price of these new CDs was the same as regular CDs, because the cost of replacing a CD player is tiny compared to the cost of replacing your audio collection with more expensive disks. If that were the case, there'd be no business case for Sony to bring this technology.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

acohen1 (1454445) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004349)

In fact the cost of replacing a CD Player is about the same as replacing one disc since discs are about $20 and cheap-ass dvd players with digital outputs are also about $20 and play audio cds just fine with huge buffers and tons of error checking.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004213)

Actually I have had one or two brand new bad CD's that just wouldn't play on any CD players. On the other hand, I just took them back. Given how many CD's I have, I'm looking at less than a 1% defect rate, so any improvement really doesn't matter. I'm not sure who has the patent on the red laser burning process, but this could be Sony's way to convince people to invest in their burners (Manufacturer's that is). It could be cheaper for plants if they only need one laser to burn both blue-ray and CD's. Other than that though, it's completely irrelevant news for the masses.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004217)

Read the article again.
or better yet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-spec_CD [wikipedia.org]

Less distortion more accurate. I like more accurate. It's not some end all game changing technology, but it is better.
I won't be surprised if this allows for more pits on the CD.

In any case, this is just a manufacturing improvement.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004465)

It allows for a blueray sized number of pits on the CD. But that isn't going to happen with this particular product.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1, Redundant)

_Hellfire_ (170113) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003537)

Ugggh...

Blu-spec CDs are compatible with existing CD players

It's in the summary. FFS.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27003829)

Plenty of people have already corrected me. I misread bigtime, I know.

Re:I'm unimpressed. RTFS (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003615)

Not to mention why should people care to replace the standard CD players that have functioned for years?

TFS: "Blu-spec CDs are compatible with existing CD players but have been mastered with higher levels of accuracy by using the same technology used to author Blu-ray discs, with the intention of eliminating reading errors that occur as a result of being authored with traditional red laser technology"

This is a way to make sure your data writes work better. I've had more than one drive that writes CDs at only 85% success rate.

Re:I'm unimpressed. RTFS (0)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003677)

More to the point, I think this technology helps with drives which have trouble reading CD-Rs. The Blu-Spec discs will work better, exercise the drive less, and prevent unexpected drop-outs in audio.

Of course, most drives manufactured these days are designed to handle the oddities of CD-Rs, so the point is probably moot for 98% of hardware on the market.

Data recovery of old CD-R (3, Interesting)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003841)

Of course, most drives manufactured these days are designed to handle the oddities of CD-Rs ...

Oddly enough, I found that my old CD-Rs (from 2001) can't be read on a modern tri-format DVD writer, but can be read accurately on a Sony-branded CDROM drive. I've verified it by copying out a 300MB ZIP file and testing it.

Of course, I found I can read my old pressed CDROMs (from 1993).

Anyway, to keep on topic ... link to Blue-spec CD [wikipedia.org]. Oh my goodness, the article's changing right before my very eyes (21:12, 26 February 2009)!

Re:I'm unimpressed. RTFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27003721)

I'd attribute that to defective cd burners and/or defective media. I've used dozens of cd drives and maybe several thousand cds and haven't had any issues with writes before.

Re:I'm unimpressed. RTFS (1)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004247)

I'd wager it's to make it harder to get a quality rip of the cd.

Think of it as trying to use a floppy that was formatted in a very new drive in a very old drive. The new drive has smaller, more precise and sensitive heads. It can read the disks it formats without problems. The older drive has larger, less precise heads and has trouble reading the disk made by the newer drive. The disk may be within spec but not what was the practical standard of the time of the old drive.

J_Random cd player probably won't have problems as the read problems will be within (intentionally) its error correction. A computer drive trying to rip it is probably going to have a helluva time.

Re:I'm unimpressed. RTFS (1)

Estanislao Martnez (203477) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004417)

This is a way to make sure your data writes work better.

Um, no, this doesn't seem to have to do anything with consumer CD writers.

Here's my guess at the real story: Sony figured out a way to use Blu-Ray pressing infrastructure to press CDs too, making it unnecessary to have CD-specific machinery at their plants. This lowers their manufacturing costs for CDs, and as a mostly unimportant side benefit, the resulting CDs are easier to read accurately by existing CD players. Some PR hack at Sony got hold of this info, and decided to turn it into a silly marketing campaign.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (5, Funny)

Guysmiley777 (880063) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003995)

And make sure you follow your $500 Ethernet cable's directional markings to allow for optimal signal transfer [denon.com]!

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004241)

And make sure you follow your $500 Ethernet cable's directional markings to allow for optimal signal transfer!

Bah, its not even snagless.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

DrLang21 (900992) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004323)

Off topic, but I would love to know if these guys actually believe the crap they write about their products or if they laugh their asses off in marketing meetings while they come up with it.

Re:I'm unimpressed. (1)

tunapez (1161697) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004423)

HAHAHAHA! Good thing the directional arrows are there or I would have tried plugging it in sideways.

Thanks for the link, proving once again: There's one born every minute.

Is it DRM free? (2, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003451)

Just wondering if anyone knows?

Re:Is it DRM free? (2, Insightful)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003737)

Maybe I'm an idiot, but how could you apply DRM to it if it works with standard CD players?

DRM can only be applied (in this case) via software, naturally the data stored on it could be encrypted, but that has nothing to do with the technology here, you'd have to find a way to apply DRM to lightwaves or something, therefore DRM would be up to the content distributor, just like everything else.

If they had developed a new hardware (ie: new player + new cd format) then DRM could be embedded into the hardware. This is basically the equivalent of making your household taps spit out water at a higher PSI, it's not converting the water into something else, or adding anything to it.

Re:Is it DRM free? (4, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003939)

There are no foolproof methods; but there are a variety of techniques that have been tried, with more pain to the legitimate than to the pirates, as usual.

There are two basic schools of design for Audio CD DRM: The one is to include, in a location that won't interfere with the audio tracks, a data track, and put some sort of nastiness in it, set to autoplay on insertion. This is . [wikipedia.org]

The other main method is to exploit differences between the Red Book standard(audio CDs) and the Yellow Book standard(CDROM drives) and introduce deliberate errors into your CD that will be negligible under redbook but problematic under yellow book. Because this is a hack, there are no really good ways to do it(and, it causes real issues with some newer stereos that use CDROM drives); but that is how it is tried.

Re:Is it DRM free? (1)

Clarious (1177725) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004105)

Yeah, in this case they can't apply DRM, but with format like SACD you can use normal CD player to read them but it still has DRM protected data (the 'high fidelity one').

Huh? (3, Insightful)

mweather (1089505) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003477)

h the intention of eliminating reading errors that occur as a result of being authored with traditional red laser technology.

I thought commercial CDs were pressed, not burnt.

Re:Huh? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27003545)

10 ETCH MASTER WITH LASER
20 PRESS CD WITH MASTER
30 PROFIT AND COMPLAIN
40 GOTO 20

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004219)

you forgot

50 AND FUCK YOU

There. Fixed that for you

Re:Huh? (4, Informative)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003613)

Yes, commercial CDs are pressed from masters... this is a supposedly more accurate way of creating the masters.

Re:Huh? (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003641)

I was wondering how long it would be until someone pointed this out (I was waiting for my 2-minute timeout from the lame joke I made elsewhere).

Re:Huh? (4, Informative)

setirw (854029) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003637)

The final polycarbonate disc is pressed. The glass master, however, is etched with a laser. The summary's still incorrect, though, as the master's created using a UV or violet laser.

TFA could be referring to the fact that red lasers are used to check the master for consistency.

memory (1)

escay (923320) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003481)

does this also mean increased storage on the CD?

Re:memory (2, Informative)

jandrese (485) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003521)

Nope, it's just a better made CD. Regular CDs aren't exactly problematic though, so it'll probably be one of those things where it gets used on expensive music collections to make people think they're buying premium stuff.

Re:memory (1)

DrLang21 (900992) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003881)

Nope. It's just a better made master for CD pressing. This might be of significant interest to the record pressing industry if there is often significant fallout when trying to etch a master. Us consumers will see no difference though.

Heh (5, Informative)

Phroggy (441) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003509)

If you RTFA, you'll notice the bottom half of it is titled:

Why this is all marketing nonsense

Funny how the summary left out that part.

Re:Heh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004145)

Also funny how they left out all about the rootkit too!

Fuck you Sony!

Re:Heh (1)

mrfaithful (1212510) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004263)

It's probably a lot to do with simply consolidating manufacturing. If they only need one set of equipment, I'd imagine that helps their bottom line. If they can get some marketing led sales out of it from gullible sorts then that's just gravy.

Re:Heh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004437)

Hi. You must be new here.

Impressions... (4, Insightful)

Firethorn (177587) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003535)

I would have been more impressed if they'd somehow managed to keep it compatible while 'hiding' a second layer such that while you'd get the traditional old two channel audio with a traditional player, a blue laser player would be able to access the second layer, enabling high fidelity, high bitrate 6 or even 8 channel sound.

As is, it sounds like they're eliminating 'errors' by doing the equivalent of printing old 200 dpi images with a modern 1200 dpi printer. Sure, it's a bit cleaner, but there's no additional information.

Re:Impressions... (2, Interesting)

McNihil (612243) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003807)

"but there's no additional information"

It is more about less additional and extraneous information than anything else.

But right... this if anything in history is a money grab.

Now if they have stiffer plastic and if the plastic has better longevity then it may be more "wise" to buy new stuff on it.

Buying old CD on CD again doesn't make any sense even if they are "remastered."

And yes I am all for better sound quality... the industry is trying its best to double dip and triple dip the consumer.

Re:Impressions... (1)

Firethorn (177587) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004087)

It is more about less additional and extraneous information than anything else.

I'd say that it's more about eliminating noise than any information. Noise isn't normally considered information, and information isn't normally considered extraneous. At least not when it's easily ignored.

These CDs will have the exact same capabilities of the old style.

And yes I am all for better sound quality... the industry is trying its best to double dip and triple dip the consumer.

Oh yes. Sony's a big one at this, I think that if they're lucky about 1 in 10 of their formats actually catch on. Of course, the biggest killer of their media formats is their insistance on riddling them with DRM - increasing the cost of the media and equipment, while crippling capabilities.

Re:Impressions... (2, Interesting)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003869)

SACD can do that with one type of the SACD discs. So if you put the disc in a SACD reading PS3 you see two disc icons pop up in the XMB.

Re:Impressions... (1)

Firethorn (177587) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003967)

Well, one of the first two generations of PS3, at least.

But yes, that was pretty much what I was proposing.

not as good as HSM cd's (2, Funny)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003561)

I much prefer my half speed master cd's.

(its easy, really. burn at 24x or even 8x 'for great justice').

sheesh.....

Mahoney! (3, Funny)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003573)

I think the more important thing that every is missing here is that Steve Guttenberg seems to have found employment again!

Finally a complement for my 200$ gold tipped cable (5, Funny)

mikeabbott420 (744514) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003579)

my bits will be much higher fidelity than other peoples! my zeros will be round and full and my ones will be straight and clean!

1s and 0s (1)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004107)

Does the 1's go into the 0's?

(You'll need an understanding of male-female activities to comprehend this question.)

Re:Finally a complement for my 200$ gold tipped ca (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004253)

Actually, if these can burn discs more accurately and more to redbook spec, I'd be all for it. I remember there was so much crap about which burners and which blank media combinations were best.

At last. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27003711)

CDs with much improved rootkits^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H error correction!

Does it matter? (1)

fprintf (82740) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003839)

With modern production techniques, does it really matter? Virtually every song that comes out today is so highly engineered and compressed for that "wall of sound" that extra fidelity just doesn't seem to make a difference. I feel like an old man, but I actually miss some of the "old" AAD CDs that were taken simply from the old master tapes. I was never a big fan of vinyl, hating all the hisses and pops etc. that would eventually accumulate, so I appreciate a good CD.

Is there something I have missed from this new release? Will sound engineers be able to give us albums and songs without all the compression? Better said, will they want to?

Volume (dynamic) compression (1)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004077)

Will sound engineers be able to give us albums and songs without all the compression?

If portable music players have stronger amplification, then I don't need any of the volume (dynamic) compression. I find myself requiring "active noise-cancellation" (so called) earphones when outside, just to hear the music... because the portable music player doesn't amplify it enough!

I do audio recordings for performing ensembles occasionally, and I edit the audio afterwords. I use a certain amount of dynamic compression, but not too much. My audio now ranges from -25dB to -1dB, giving the listener about 24dB of dynamic headroom.

It's definitely too soft on normal MP3 players... and even softer if the listener switches on extra bass (because some players reduces the mid- and high-ranges to simulate a stronger bass).

My sound card is the only device capable of driving a strong sound to my earphones. I welcome the day when portable music players amplify a lot more strongly (especially the bass), then I think engineers may just go easy on the dynamic compression.

Ok (2, Insightful)

ShooterNeo (555040) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003849)

So, since a CD is digital, with error correction codes, the ONLY thing this solves is that it might make it easier for a cheap, portable CD player to read the disk. When you rip that CD to a lossless audio file, current technology will do that just fine.

Uh...hello? What exactly is the point, then? Last I heard, portable CD players have been made completely and utterly obsolete due to the advent of portable MP3 players, which are now cheaper, smaller, and can hold a whole CD binder worth of music in a device smaller than a cellphone.

Re:Ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004393)

The problem is error correction, which is not a cure, it's a best guess. Why do you think there's no equivalent of md5sums on junk audio CDs? I'd say this is about 10 years too late. But then CD licenses have expired and Philips plus Sony need to pull in licensing fees for this tech from somewhere. It's their duty to the shareholders, even if the market for it is rapidly dwindling.

I get my music from tagoo.ru and piratebay... (1)

Phizzle (1109923) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003855)

So how does this new technology impact me?

Re:I get my music from tagoo.ru and piratebay... (1)

Alzheimers (467217) | more than 5 years ago | (#27003913)

Well, if you're a recording artist, surely having a more reliable method of creating CDs means that the "breakage" rate will go down and your profits will go up.

right?

Re:I get my music from tagoo.ru and piratebay... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004211)

it doesn't.
you're still an asshole though.

Can't wait for the Blu-spec CD Star Wars! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27003961)

C'mon George - you know you want to!

But they introduce the errors anyway! (2, Insightful)

james_marsh (147079) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004055)

The only problem I've ever had with audible "errors" on CD are when the publishers have introduced them as part of some sort of brain dead DRM attempt!

Make them harder. (5, Interesting)

DamnStupidElf (649844) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004097)

Stick a better anti-scratch coating on the data side of CDs
(and DVDs), and they'll be much better than just cutting the pits and lands more accurately.

Woohoo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004099)

Someone fixed the typo between the firehose and here!

(see, we do notice)

To Slashdot ; RE Your Story +1, Extra-Seditious (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27004121)

Slashdot: News For Nerdz - Stuff That DOESN'T Matter

Try the Slashdot killer app: news.google.com [google.com].

Yours In Socialism,
Kilgore Trout

Are We There Yet? (1)

Bruce Perens (3872) | more than 5 years ago | (#27004309)

I'd think that, at this late date, we could sell CD-size USB sticks for less than 50 cents. Perhaps we can't beat the price of mass CD manufacture, but we can sure beat the price of writable ones, and come close enough to the mass CD price that it becomes a small fraction of the product cost.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...