Please help me - Audio cd writing tech problems
MystiqueRich
One thing you should test if you want, I'm quite sure of the result,
is your
burned CD being a multi-session or not. Also, is the CD closed or not.
Those
older CD readers were not intended to read those CDs with the Table Of
Contents
placed differently since the technology did not exist at that time. This is
mainly
why you often can't read a multi-session CD on an old PC with 4x or 6x or
this
generation of readers.
Neither those CD readers can read CDRW, as some of you might have
experienced, since the surface hasn't quite the same composition and
reflectivity.
Richard Halle
ric...@hotmail.com
Isaac <is...@latveria.castledoom.org> wrote in message
news:slrn92i0k6...@latveria.castledoom.org...
> On Fri, 01 Dec 2000 18:10:08 +0000, Ian Tindale <do...@email.me> wrote:
> >
> >If you double the rotational speed of the media, but keep the light
> >level the same, surely you've halved the exposure time, (the effective
> >equivalent of the 'shutter speed'), or in effect, underexposed it by one
> >stop. Double the rotational speed again, and you underexpose by 2 stops.
> >Etc.
> >
> >Or maybe the CD burner makers are smarter than this, and the LED output
> >compensates for the rotational speed, giving a constant exposure.
> >
> The CD burners do compensate for this, but I'm not sure that in every
> case they can guarantee a perfect burn. I'm sure the formula used to
> compensate is more complicated than doubling the amount of light
> when the speed is doubled.
>
> The basic premise of the first poster is not quite right. You don't have
> to match the speed of the reader to the speed of the reader. However
> readers as slow as 4x are probably older devices. Today's readers are
> advertised as 40-60x. The older cdrom readers were never intended
> to read disks with as low a reflectivity as cdrs have, so it's not too
> surprising that those older burners are more sensitive to how the
> disks are burned.
>
> Isaac