How often do the masterers choose DDP, now in mid 2011

[8080JP]

With technology and awareness on the improve and now that we are in MID 2011,
just wondering what percentage of masters are now in DDP format to be sent to the plant.

Are the results as accurate on the manufactured disk as the original wavfiles , or do the sounds sound everso slightly worse.

THe funny thing as some masterers and sound engineers have noticed, for some strange reason different CD- Roms can sound different, no one knows why.

Anyway I am wondering if the SONORIS DDP CREATOR is top of the range.
What are masterers using and are happy with perfect sound replication if there is such a thing

[Twerk]

About 90% of the masters I send to plants are DDP.

[8080JP]

Originally Posted by Twerk

About 90% of the masters I send to plants are DDP.

That's interesting, why the 10 percent then for CD-Rom.

Are the results really good.
ApparentlY a few years ago there were error detection problems or whatever.

Do you use SONORIS?

[Lagerfeldt]

Originally Posted by 8080JP

With technology and awareness on the improve and now that we are in MID 2011,
just wondering what percentage of masters are now in DDP format to be sent to the plant.

20% DPP/80% Red Book CD's here. Most of the major labels I work for, such as EMI, always requests DDP, while smaller companies and independent producers tend to ask for a Red Book CD.

Companies that request a DDP image generally request reference CD's too. I always burn and check an audio CD when I'm sending a DDP image.

Either the DDP image is zipped and uploaded or I burn it on a DVD-R in order to prevent the plant from accidentally transferring the image 1:1 on a CD-ROM instead of making an audio CD.

Are the results as accurate on the manufactured disk as the original wavfiles , or do the sounds sound everso slightly worse.

Identical. Unless someone messes with your audio and makes a new master the sound will be the same. There's nothing in the process that will change the sound.

THe funny thing as some masterers and sound engineers have noticed, for some strange reason different CD- Roms can sound different, no one knows why.

CD-ROM (Read Only Memory) is a factory pressed CD containing computer data. CD-R (Recordable) is a format for burning your own data or audio.

If one burned CD-R causes the real time error correction of a CD-player to kick in, in such a way that it's audible and more so or differently than another burned CD-R, the two CD's could sound different.

Factory pressed audio CD's aren't burned but made from a glass master template.

[8080JP]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

20% DPP/80% Red Book CD's here. Most of the major labels I work for, such as EMI, always requests DDP, while smaller companies and independent producers tend to ask for a Red Book CD.

Companies that request a DDP image generally request reference CD's too. I always burn and check an audio CD when I'm sending a DDP image.

Either the DDP image is zipped and uploaded or I burn it on a DVD-R in order to prevent the plant from accidentally transferring the image 1:1 on a CD-ROM instead of making an audio CD.


Identical. Unless someone messes with your audio and makes a new master the sound will be the same. There's nothing in the process that will change the sound.


CD-ROM (Read Only Memory) is a factory pressed CD containing computer data. CD-R (Recordable) is a format for burning your own data or audio.

If one burned CD-R causes the real time error correction of a CD-player to kick in, in such a way that it's audible and more so or differently than another burned CD-R, the two CD's could sound different.

Factory pressed audio CD's aren't burned but made from a glass master template.

What about USB stick?

Is there any ripping involved in your DVD-R at the plant.

I guess that is why DDP's are getting more popular.

Ripping from CD-R or DVD-R can get the 1's an 0's wrong.

I also did mean CD-R not CD-ROM, when I mentioned that different companys CD-Rs somehow lead to slight differences in sound when the same music is burned on them.

John Vestman has written an article on the irregularities of digital.
http://www.johnvestman.com/digital_myth.htm

I have good speakers and I can hear what Vestman is writing about here.

I have also noticed that one plant has a different sound to another. Must be the quality of their CD-ROM's or something

[finetuner]

Contrary to what the thread title seems to imply, it's usually not the masterer who chooses the format. As we're service orientated, we deliver what the client requests.
At the same time new cleints may be unfamiliar with DDP so there lies a task for us to point out the possibility.

As to the ratio, here it's about 10% DDP still only.

Using a combination of SoundBlade and Sonoris. Sonoris is a great progam; Easy to use and up to par. Just take a look at their client list.

[mastertone]

This year it´s been 90% DDP, The rest is Redbook CD, and wav´s / mp3´s for digital releases.

[Darius van H]

About 50/50 here, with DDP on the steady increase. Sony / Universal / EMI are all strictly DDP these days, with most other larger labels also requesting DDP.

I'll always choose and even push for DDP (Arranging Fedex to Tokyo is not my idea of fun)

Working today with an artist who wants to send a physical CD master to the USA - he doesn't trust uploading it

[Joe_caithness]

I havn't been asked once to do a DDP, most people just want the correctly sequenced WAVs to send to their digital distros these days, here atleast.

[finetuner]

Originally Posted by Darius van H

Arranging Fedex to Tokyo is not my idea of fun

, .. word

[pmx]

i always make a ddp, as soundblade creates a redbook from a ddp. i strongly encourage delivering by ddp instead of redbook though, so maybe 10% of the masters makes it to cd-r, except ref's of course.

clients receive their ddp as an archive on a dvd with the wav's and mp3's included. that way they always have something to keep in their safes, and it doesn't become one of those folders on someone's computer but something more tangible.

[Adam Dempsey]

Originally Posted by 8080JP

I have also noticed that one plant has a different sound to another. Must be the quality of their CD-ROM's or something

Only wrt jitter at the Laser Beam Recorder - and pretty much a thing of the past now. Read this from the late Roger Nichols: CDs Give Me The Jitters!

[Greg Reierson]

Originally Posted by 8080JP

THe funny thing as some masterers and sound engineers have noticed, for some strange reason different CD- Roms can sound different, no one knows why.

Bullshit. As you say, it's 2011.

Still 95% physical masters here. DDP for quick turn times and long distances.


GR

[Masterer]

Close to 100% DDP [when a client orders a master. I also send a lot of .wav files].

Who can wait for Fed Ex anymore?

[Cellotron]

Without actually opening up Quickbooks to get verified numbers I'd guess:

50% CD-R master
10% DDP
10% hi-res files as vinyl record pre-masters
30% wav+cue (including with this sometimes mp3/FLAC as well) (for digital only releases with possibly burning of master discs at clients remote location)

While the amount of DDP I am doing has been going up, the bigger trend I am seeing is for no CD's to be made for the release at all.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[wado1942]

Most of the time, I don't do either these days. A lot of clients just want high-res WAV uploads or MP3s. But, I'd say I've made about 10 CD-R audio masters in the last year.

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by 8080JP

With technology and awareness on the improve and now that we are in MID 2011,
just wondering what percentage of masters are now in DDP format to be sent to the plant.

Just a note that it's the client that chooses what delivery formats are to be used (which depends on the replicator or duplicator they choose to use) and not the mastering engineer.

Are the results as accurate on the manufactured disk as the original wavfiles , or do the sounds sound everso slightly worse.

If a plant is using current glass mastering methods and doing proper diligence the resulting sound on the replicated discs should be no different between a Redbook spec compliant CD-R master or a DDP image.

THe funny thing as some masterers and sound engineers have noticed, for some strange reason different CD- Roms can sound different, no one knows why.

This is not correct. We do know why - the reason is because of potential jitter in mediocre DAC's, and the reasons detailed here - Why We Believe

Anyway I am wondering if the SONORIS DDP CREATOR is top of the range.

DDP Creator is very well supported and very well coded and has been proven to create DDP images and CD-R master discs absolutely within Redbook specs. I highly reccomend it.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by Adam Dempsey

Only wrt jitter at the Laser Beam Recorder - and pretty much a thing of the past now. Read this from the late Roger Nichols: CDs Give Me The Jitters!

While to some point still slightly relevant - this is pretty outdated info - as there have been some major updates since then with the Eclipse suite and automated glass mastering systems.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Bonati]

0% DDP here.

[Twerk]

Originally Posted by Cellotron

Just a note that it's the client that chooses what delivery formats are to be used (which depends on the replicator or duplicator they choose to use) and not the mastering engineer.

I totally agree with you Steve, but many of my clients have no idea what a DDP even is, so educating them a bit on the advantages usually sways them in that direction. So yeah, the clients have the final say, but my input has a big influence over what that decision is.

[Waltz Mastering]

About 20:1 Red book cdr over ddp here.

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by 8080JP

What about USB stick?

Is there any ripping involved in your DVD-R at the plant.

These are ROM's so involve data copying rather than Digital Audio Extraction - aka "ripping"

Ripping from CD-R or DVD-R can get the 1's an 0's wrong.

But with any reputable replicator using up to date methods it won't. Why? Because first they will do a test on the provided CD-R master to make sure there are absolutely no uncorrectable errors on the disc. And then they will use a software with advanced "secure" digital audio extraction routines (which will re-read any frames where a error flag has been triggered) when "ripping" the image off of the provided CD-R audio master. This results in a data image that nulls absolutely 100% with the original data image! This is easy enough to verify for yourself simply by using a software such as Exact Audio Copy - Exact Audio Copy - to rip a burned audio CD-R's imageand then doing a null test against the original source image. The Eclipse software that most replicators in fact offers even more sophisticated and accurate secure ripping than even EAC does.

I also did mean CD-R not CD-ROM, when I mentioned that different companys CD-Rs somehow lead to slight differences in sound when the same music is burned on them.

Some CD-R's/burner/software combinations will indeed result in higher BLER and or presence of uncorrectable errors - but at this point it's incredibly easy to burn a CD-R with extremely low BLER and no C2's or CU's (aka "E32's") - and there is indeed software that can test and verify this.

John Vestman has written an article on the irregularities of digital.
CD/Audio Mastering - Digital Myths?

To be absolutely blunt about it - John doesn't know what the heck he is talking about in the least and his points are easily debunked.

I have good speakers and I can hear what Vestman is writing about here.

I'd say you both are the victims of the placebo effect. Doing double blind a/b/x's are in order for you to really hear what is going on.

I have also noticed that one plant has a different sound to another. Must be the quality of their CD-ROM's or something

Replicators press discs with a nickel stamper made from a glass master that has been exposed by a Laser Beam Recorder (LBR). Duplicators burn on blank CD-R's. So "CD-ROM" has nothing to do with it.
Poor pit geometry can influence the sound of playback with DAC's that have poor jitter correction. The way to stop these variations in sound is to improve your DAC.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by Twerk

I totally agree with you Steve, but many of my clients have no idea what a DDP even is, so educating them a bit on the advantages usually sways them in that direction. So yeah, the clients have the final say, but my input has a big influence over what that decision is.

Of course. I always mention DDP as an option to new clients and ask them to check with the plant whether they can accept it (and sometimes direct clients to plants that can in fact accept the format). But in the end - they're the ones who choose the plant, and many plants absurbly still do not accept DDP!

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Twerk]

Originally Posted by Darius van H

(Arranging Fedex to Tokyo is not my idea of fun)

The customs forms alone are enough to warrant the benefits of DDP.

[Lagerfeldt]

Originally Posted by 8080JP

Is there any ripping involved in your DVD-R at the plant.

It's data, not audio.

Ripping from CD-R or DVD-R can get the 1's an 0's wrong.

Ripping audio from a CD-R in a computer and playing audio, like a CD-player does, are two entirely different methods.

When you're ripping audio you can use offline error correction and verify your data using a null test, while CD-players are dependent on real-time error correction using only a short buffer.

John Vestman has written an article on the irregularities of digital.
CD/Audio Mastering - Digital Myths?

John Vestman is also the guy who claims the hard disks sound different. He's probably a nice guy, but he has no clue what he's talking about.

I have good speakers and I can hear what Vestman is writing about here.

I have also noticed that one plant has a different sound to another. Must be the quality of their CD-ROM's or something

Again, a CD-ROM is something else than a CD-R. ;-)

What you're hearing is most likely placebo. Try doing a scientific test or just an ABX test.

[OMF]

Mostly DDPi for replication here, probably 10% Red Book. And since I got the Sonoris software to do DDP images of enhanced CDs, I'll try to go 100% DDP

greets

Tim

[MASSIVE Master]

50/50 by request -- I usually add a rep-ready CD-R even if the order is for physical-delivery of a DDP.

Otherwise, unless it's simply digital audio files, I always push for DDP.

[24-96 Mastering]

75% DDP (online), 20% individual wav files (online), 5% CDRs (attended or snail mail)

[Franco]

80% Digital Files*
19% Red Book
1% DDP (that I had to outsource because it's only been the 2nd time a client has requested it).

*Most of my clients are doing less and less CD replication/duplication; usually short runs. I work with indy labels & artists only. If there's an increase in request for a particular file format recently, for me it's FLAC (I believe it's due to the increasing amount of digital distribution sites that offer FLAC as a high rez download format).

I'm also seeing an increase of jobs going to vinyl and for that, digital files are what cutters ask for.

[8080JP]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

It's data, not audio.



John Vestman is also the guy who claims the hard disks sound different. He's probably a nice guy, but he has no clue what he's talking about.

I dont agree here.
In my opinion he has pointed out instances where digital copies have sounded different.

I know a number of musicians who can hear these differences, although much less today than say 4 years ago with better technology.

His masters sound great by the way. Bought 2 of the CD's he mastered.