Yes. It does not.
13 responses Add your response
It really depends on the CD recorder/burner.
I have an inferior CD burner and a Professional CD Recorder.
Which one do you think I prefer?
Also, The CD recorder is with my Audio Equipment, my computer is on the upper level.
CD recorder can accept toslink, Coax, Balanced, single ended has digital and Analog volumne control and VU Meters.
And makes fantastic recordings.
My computer is a drop and drag...more drag.Good for recording off of the internet if you like that sort of thing
There is a audiophile madness that has been spread by all the rubbish written in the audiophile press to make you feel nervous about your equipment.
I have yet to find a fully working computer cd burner that does not burn files correctly onto a disk. Assuming the in the case of audio that the correct bandwidth is being used and the speed of the burning process is low, you will find it hard to beat.
If you are noticing your standalone cd recorder sounds different I would guess it is more to do with how you are feeding the information to it.
Personally I have many of the outboard recorders including years ago DATs, harddisk recorders and cd burners. Burning files direct from the computer has always been the best way out of jail. But if you are using your burner like an old fashioned tape recorder, then all the usual audiophile paranoid stuff will apply. Like how good are the input amps cables etc and recording levels.
My personal experience was that even basic stand-alone CD recorders outperform my crappy computer's sound card. Note that ripped and burned CDs made on my computer are fine, but digitizing analog sources (cassette tapes, for example) resulted in very noisy CDRs. I have been using a "prosumer" Marantz CDR-632 for about three years with pleasing results.
I think the basic points have been made well in the previous posts.
It's not clear if you are talking about burning digital files on the one hand, or analog sources which are digitized by the computer or cdr on the other hand. If the latter, the digitizing (a/d conversion) is being done in the computer by what is undoubtedly (by audiophile standards) a lo-fi chip and circuit, which is surrounded by all kinds of potent digital noise generators.
If you are talking about burning digital files, I too would strongly suggest a burn rate which is substantially less than the rating of the media.
And I too am curious as to what "vf recording" means. Voice frequency? Ventricular fibrillation?:
Stand-alone CD recorder is best for a simple one-box solution, with everything already designed to work a certain way (which can be good or bad). Disadvantages are slow burning, and very limited editing capability . . . and usually you have to use special "CD-R music" discs, rather than "CD-R data" discs.
The computer route is far fussier for acheiving high sound quality, as you have to personally take responsibility for finding a good audio interface ("sound card"), setting up the software, making sure the drivers or OS doesn't screw things up, organising and taging the music files in a way that preserves the audio quality and makes them easy to find, using a reliable cd burner drive, etc. A real pain, but if you want to easily edit the contents or quickly burn multiple copies, it's very much worth it.
These days, I use a computer for live recording . . . but sometimes the editing still seems like more of a hassle than in the days when I could simply cut and splice analog tape. But I definately don't miss having to quickly swap reels between pieces, or the cost of the tape itself.
to solve the great mystery, "vf" is an inadvertent typo--i meant to type "cd" but misfired. my specific quest in starting the thread is to seek insight as to why a cd burned on the standalone cdr sounds different (and, to my ears, truer to the original) than the computer burned copy.
thanks for the responses, y'all