2nd run pressing from a first run CD

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

A company I deal with needs to get on eof their CDs re-pressed, but they don't have access to the original master (which I think was exabyte? or a pecial sort of CD).

Is it possible to do this second run from one of the CDs in the first run?

Could they do a 5th run say froma 3rd run CD?

Is there any loss of quality?

Is this just the debate about making digital copies, looked at another way?

― mei (mei), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 10:45 (twenty years ago)

I've already been told that it's okay to do a second run from a first, but not from subsequent pressings as they may be some loss of quality, "especially at the top end".

This last bit bothers me, it's certainyl true of analogue copies, which makes me think someone has confused the two.

― mei (mei), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 10:47 (twenty years ago)

cds allegedly "lose" bottom end when reproduced. i find the claim dubious.

― jim p. irrelevant (electricsound), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 10:54 (twenty years ago)

it's just 1s and 0s. if done correctly a digital copy should be the exact goddamn same from 1st generation to 500th generation.

― el sabor de gene (yournullfame), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 12:52 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, that sounds about as ridiculous as saying "sorry about the letters in this email being a bit blurry, I installed a second-generation copy of Outlook".

― The Vintner's Lipogram (OleM), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 17:52 (twenty years ago)

but they don't have access to the original master.

Doesn't this make them indistinguishable from counterfeiters?

― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 18:30 (twenty years ago)

I'm pretty sure that CD copying involves error-correction ---- i.e. the source data is misread at various points during the process and whatever software is being used tries to compensate.

Like the software will just pull new 1s and 0s out of its ass --------- stuff that it thinks will work with the surrounding data, according to some average or algorithm. And it substitutes this data for the stuff that was incorrectly read.

So that's why there's quality loss when copying a CD ---- though it's pretty much imperceptible unless you have a really crappy drive or crappy software or it's like a 100th generation copy.

I think making faster copies can mean more errors to smudge over --- again depending on the quality of the drive.

But still ----- this is some mysterious shit to me. Anybody who knows for real speak up!

― reacher, Tuesday, 20 December 2005 18:59 (twenty years ago)

(---- and I guess the quality vs. crappiness of the media would affect this too)

― reacher, Tuesday, 20 December 2005 19:08 (twenty years ago)

reacher's OTM. Ripping doesn't always result in a perfect sonic copy.
Need proof? Try to rip a copy of The Stooges' Raw Power. Let me know if your copy sounds anything like the original. Iggy's overloaded remix is a unique form of copy protection.

Programs like Exact Audio Copy or cdparanoia are designed to provide greater fidelity during the ripping process, re-reading sectors instead of compensating for missed reads. But even they are not 100% (see above).

― Edward III (edward iii), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 14:08 (twenty years ago)

Surely a professional outfit or the Library of Congress has more advanced tools than EAC..?

― D.I.Y. U.N.K.L.E. (dave225.3), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 14:15 (twenty years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.