Here is a new spin on "vaporware". I have discovered 2 cdr copies
that are no longer playable. One is a year old the other 4 years. I
use the best media and factories, when choosing blank media and
store all of my media in optimal temp away from UV light.

I have not gone through all of my CDRs to determind if others are
unreadable but this is a disturbing turn of events.

After recording on DAT for 13 years, I have had little to no
problems. Luckly, I have the master DAT for the 2 lost CDRs. But, if
I didn't, "vaporware"!

This is not good. Has anyone else had this problem? If so, I believe
as consumers we are being duped and have a legitament beef with the

Also, it may be a "real" reason for us not to leave behind magnetic
media. I know this was the complaint when people were jumping from
analog to digital and the catastrophic loss with DAT but at least
DAT last a lot longer than CDR's. At least that is what my
experience has been so far. I have DAT tapes that are 13 years old
and play back with 0 errors.

Other's feedback is appreciated. However, please remember that all my
media is optimally choosen and stored. I've been at this game for
too long to make a "rookie" mistake.

For more information on CDR's see
I recently took a LINUX course and CDR, CD-RW longevity was mentioned as an issue for data backup media. Apparently this technology has not been around long enough demonstrate reliability and long life. The judgement is still out. BTW, tape backup was considered the fastest and most reliable.
"For preservation, said Gibson, the Library of Congress - the largest information collector in the world – depends on half- track, quarter inch analog audio tape for backing up its over three million sound recordings."

Namely, all digital media are not considered for long term archival purposes by anyone serious about longevity. Analog master tapes 50 years old play as well today as the day they were recorded. DAT or CD-R are short term storage solutions.
did you use? I've used the Kodak Gold (no longer made) specifically because of the accelerated aging tests done by Kodak on the media showing a 30 year life. I haven't seen the tests on the Kodak silver/gold yet. I am not aware of other manufacturers who publish aging data. Have you seen any data from other manufacturers from accelerated aging tests? I'm asking as at some point, I will run out of my stash of Kodak Gold disks. I use them mainly to store photo images, and at this point, even 30 years doesn't come close to film longevity.
T.Y. is my main brand. Again, I use the best media and storage possible.

This problem is well spread and not limited to brand type.

Warning, "do not expect to use CDR as a media form". As for analog tape, well, there are many reports of shredding and baking to save the tape for one last pass."
Hmm. You must be lucky with your DAT tape. At least with regards to computer backups. occasionally we'll encounter trouble with older media (+5 years).
The shredding/baking was a result of a defective tape manufacturing process from the 70s. The problem was that the polyeurethane in the binder hydrolized causing sticky tape syndrome. Any magnetic tape medium with ployeurethane in it could exhibit the same problem if the tape was imporperly manufactured and/or stored.

An analog tape that is stored under proper conditions (low humidity and temp controlled) and is not from this time period has been determined to have the longest archival shelf life for these purposes. Even tapes that do exhibit sticky tape syndrome can be baked and played with complete recovery of all information on the tape, something that will not happen when CD-Rs and DATs start to die.

Also keep in mind that the technology to play back an analog tape has remained consistently available since the format's introduction. I am not sure in 50 years you will be able to say the same about digital based technology...
I always use mitsui media, it is more expensive but I have burnt cd's going back 7-8 years (can't say the same thing about my stack of DAT's, none of them work) that are working perfectly. Most ad agencies have the same thing, to much info to fit on tapes (are new tape drive is going to cost $100,000 to just backup new work each day). We are archiving to DVD now as blank media is only $3.75 a disc now. Have not tried to burn any audio tracks yet, will do that soon.
My partner at work is very much into digital technology. He told me a LONG time ago that CDR's and especially CDRW's should not be counted on for long term archiving as they are far from "flawless". He also told me that i was speeding up their death rate by "trimming" the edges of CDR's with my Audio Desk Systeme.

Oh well.... Sean
I have been recording "live" performances in the feild for 20 years or more. The last 13 years on DAT, which would include some 2,500 hours on over 1,500 DAT tapes. That is a fair representation when creating a statistical baseline as for the reliabilty of DAT tape.

DSS tapes are known to not last as long as Audio DAT. Whether it is due computer drives rewinding and forwarding way more often than an audio tape or less QA I don't know or care. It's not the point!

As for magnetic R to R, well, it just not feasible for in the field recording and again that is not the point of the post. Your preaching to the chior!

The point is this: The industry has sold you a 30 year roof which leaks and is falling apart after the first year. Now, we can "blame the victims" or we can create a large enough voice so that this shame "vaporware" is exposed.

Do you think people would be buying CDR's if in large print it stated, "We can not accept any responsibility for the longevity of the burned media. It has been determind that within a year's time your recordings may no longer be playable and further for proper storage you sould back everything to DAT, R to R, cassette or better yet "vinyl"?

I don't think so!

If that were the case I would be buying stock in companies that manufacture cassette decks!

Where, oh where, are the Ralph Naders?
If you have further interest in problems with CDR's go to and look into the taper's forum. I have posted my concerns there and there is the possibility to begin a data base containing manufacturers of CDR's and failure rate. This information can then be used in order to lobby the FTC if needed.
MITSU, MITSU, MITSU! They sound the best, and they have the least amount of optical defects. Their patented dye is MUCH more resistant to sunlight than all the others. I have no idea if these will last for 10 years +, but I've been told by quite a few people that they are MUCH better than all the rest. (At least you'll be using the longest lasting CD-R if you use Mitsu)
I asked my partner at work about this today. He said that he just saw something about "gold on gold" CDR's lasting the longest. I'll have to pry more details out of him as we ended up getting too busy to talk much. Sean
Mitsu are prone to pealing, since they do not use a protective layer. At least that is what has been reported by many people who have used them extensively.

Vist for further information. You should go to their tapers discussion page for further reports.

Many have stopped using them due to this problem.
Sorry to hear about the "lost" CD-Rs. You did not mention
what type of CD recording device you used to make your
CD-Rs. I own a media duplication company; and we only use
standalone, commercial CD recorders for duplicating audio
media. And we rarely use recording speeds over 4X; though
we have the option to use faster speeds with our equipment.
We have used various types of CD media - including Mitsui
and T.Y. - with pretty decent results. Personally, my favorite CD media for recording audio is the Maxell CD-R
80s, which are optimized for recording music.
I am pretty much convinced from numerous past experiences, that most computer-based CD-R units are low-ball junk. Virtually every time our company gets a CD that
will not play properly on our commercial CD players (we use
Denon and Sony), it was "burned" on a computer or at very
high speed (usually 20X play speed). Not sure if this info
is any help - but do consider that this is what works for a
12+ year old company.

One was made on a computer and the other was made on a Marantz CDR 630. Neither of the problems are related to the recorders. Too many people have had problems with blank CDR's using a wide variety of machines to blame a specific machine.

Maxell's are made by TY. Maxell does not manufacture their own CDR's.

All of my CDR's are recorded at "real" time. However, reports indicate that 4X may be better. Who knows or cares at this point!

I will continue to burn for trade but it has become apparent that I will need to look into a real arcival medium. But, that will have to wait until I can afford around $100,000 or so in order to but a tube R-R and lots of Ampex!