2. digital
  3. 1312243021

Can Redbook CD Be Saved

This type of thread has been discussed in various OPs elsewhere in one form or another. Some have said that the future belongs to one type of hi rez format or another, or maybe even various types of formats. Well, redbook CD has been around for three decades and many of us "old heads" have made significant investments in our CDPs and redbook CD collections based on 16 bit/44.1 kHz technology.

So I ask those knowledgeable in digital formats whether it is possible that redbook CD technology can be improved to the point that it could be substantially comparable to the various so called "cutting edge" hi rez formats coming down the pike? Maybe the improvements would have to start at the recording studio. Dunno?? But I would appreciate learning whether redbook CD equipment and CDs are headed the way of the 8-track?

Thanks
bifwynne
timlub
1,649 posts
 
Compact Disc are a digital source recorded at 16 bit 44.1khz. I haven't heard too much argument that anyone spending time with SACD will say that it is better than CD... SACD records 24 bit up to 96khz... This quality can easily be maintained in a file on a computer with much better consistency. To quote nonnoise:
"As I've stated elsewhere, there are some damn fine CDs out there and they should all be made to the same standards"
Hi RES files solve this dilema.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
nglazer
734 posts
 
Saved from what? Haven't heard anything reliable that endangers it.

Neal
rrog
1,958 posts
 
Want better sound from CD? Get a better CD player.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
14,147 posts
 
A treated CD can often sound noticably better than an untreated SACD. In any case, there doesn't seem to be much consistency among Redbook CDs or among SACDs or even higher bit rate CDs. It all depends.
bifwynne OP
2,069 posts
 
I'm reading the various comments with great interest. I'm not sure if the comment about wanting better CD requires better CDP was directed to me or if was just a general comment. If directed to me, I think my CDP is very good quality. As to the comment that redbook CD "sound has improved so much the last few years i've dumped my analog rig," is not where I hold. IME, in a comparison of recording to recording, my analog set up leaves my CD rig behind in a puff of smoke.

IMHO, I agree with Nonoise's comment that QC may be the key:

"Taking care to improve the quality of a CD recording and mastering would go a long way towards keeping it alive and well. Wasn't there a kind of HD series of CDs some years back that used the extra, unused portion of that last bit that went some ways to improving the sound of the CD? What happened to that?

"As I've stated elsewhere, there are some damn fine CDs out there and they should all be made to the same standards.

"Another thing: has there been any attempt to improve the encoding of redbook CDs that could be read by the current lenses? It seems to be a matter of QC on the part of the labels."

I hope the comments continue. Personally, I've made a significant investment in my CDP and CDs and I would very much like to see the redbook CD format stick around, but with higher level of QC being maintained. One of the reasons I've started this OP is because it anecdotally seems that DACs are taking off and who knows what format (if any) will become the inductry standard in the future.

Thanks all.
More to discover