checking CDR error rate on Mac OSX

[Andy Sneap]

Any ideas???? Anyone know if there's any software that'll let me do this??

[johnjm22]

Bump.

[Brad Blackwood]

None that I know of, unless Plextools can run under something like VirtualPC...

[Essay]

Andy-

Check this out:

http://www.infinadyne.com/cddvd_diagnostic.html

I'm not sure if this is what you are lookikng for, but the free demo version will check CD's and DVD's. Hope that helps....

Steve

[pounce]

that's not a mac program!

anyhow, many of us would like an osx program that would check our cd's and dvd's. i sure would.

[dave-G]

Originally posted by Brad Blackwood
None that I know of, unless Plextools can run under something like VirtualPC...

I know I've said this before, but I swear I will test this sometime in the next week or so and post back here.

-dave

[James Murphy]

hey Andy.. did you ever find an app for this?

James M.

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by dave-G

I know I've said this before, but I swear I will test this sometime in the next week or so and post back here.

-dave

Strongly doubted, as burn and disk diagnostic software has to be tightly tied to those subsystems in the OS.


Many of my burn apps (on another OS that begins with w) have confirmation features -- which presumably range from checksums to actual bit comparisons).

My first burner back in '96 (a rocket-fast 2x... back then blanks wer $18 apiece) would sometimes introduce errors on audio burns -- but, come to think of it, when I got rid of the horrible software I first bought (a title now owned by Adaptec) and started doing my CDs in CD Architect, my problems disappeared. Even MusicMatch could do a clean burn where the (Adaptec) software couldn't.

I haven't run into too many problems since (except maybe, an ultra-ultra-cheap batch of blanks that simply wouldn't work in one machine but was fine in my other. Go figure.)

[chadly]

I haven't seen one for OSX- though it'd be pretty neat. While this thread is going, is there any software out there (PC or Mac, pref PC) that can generate the paperwork that you send in with a master to the plant? Sort of like Wavelab, only after the fact? Mastering guys know what I'm talking about if I'm not being too clear.

[alphajerk]

plextools link and how does it work? could one say create a image on a MAC and burn a CD on that then xfer over the image to a pc and have it check the disc vs the image?

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by chadly

I haven't seen one for OSX- though it'd be pretty neat. While this thread is going, is there any software out there (PC or Mac, pref PC) that can generate the paperwork that you send in with a master to the plant? Sort of like Wavelab, only after the fact? Mastering guys know what I'm talking about if I'm not being too clear.

That's often called the PQ List.

It's a list of PQ codes [the time codes that mark the beginnings and ends of tracks and audio [two different things], basically.

The way replication is usually done these days, the rep house is going to extract the PQ codes from your CD-R master, anyhow, I think, forming their own PQ list.

A lot of these standards evolved in the days of submitting masters in digital tape formats so proper PQ code lists were absolutely vital. I suspect many houses that still require PQ lists do it to cut down on nuisance customers.

I imagine most serious CD mastering softwares can output some kind of PQ list.

In Sony's CD Architect (for Windows -- formerly from Sonic Foundry, the ACID and Sound Forge people -- and apparently now to be included in Sound Forge*) there's a "Copy Track List to Clipboard" function specifically to facilitate that. You choose the format called "Cue sheet for replication" which puts it in the standard replication format, each track relative to the beginning of the CD (ie, times include the 2 min 'header area' at the beginning of the CD.)

I've only sent one CD for replication (and they did ask for a PQ list -- but the graphics requirements were 85% of the work, they were a pain... but at least I could demonstrate to the client that I was truly a one stop shop from mastering to cover design. Pretty funny.) And I'm pretty sure the guy said they generally never needed the PQ list. But, it's been a while.


*Coincidentally, I hadn't upgraded my SF since version 5. But I saw last night where Sony was selling upgrades from ANY version of SF to SF 8 for only a hundred bucks US (thru 4/15) and throwing in CD- Architect (and I think they'll be bundled from here on out, but don't bet the farm on it). I'd also owned CD Architect in the pre-XP version and was anxious to get an up to date version, so, this was jelly.

[chadly]

Originally Posted by theblue1

That's often called the PQ List.

It's a list of PQ codes [the time codes that mark the beginnings and ends of tracks and audio [two different things], basically.

The way replication is usually done these days, the rep house is going to extract the PQ codes from your CD-R master, anyhow, I think, forming their own PQ list.

A lot of these standards evolved in the days of submitting masters in digital tape formats so proper PQ code lists were absolutely vital. I suspect many houses that still require PQ lists do it to cut down on nuisance customers.

I imagine most serious CD mastering softwares can output some kind of PQ list.

In Sony's CD Architect (for Windows -- formerly from Sonic Foundry, the ACID and Sound Forge people -- and apparently now to be included in Sound Forge*) there's a "Copy Track List to Clipboard" function specifically to facilitate that. You choose the format called "Cue sheet for replication" which puts it in the standard replication format, each track relative to the beginning of the CD (ie, times include the 2 min 'header area' at the beginning of the CD.)

I've only sent one CD for replication (and they did ask for a PQ list -- but the graphics requirements were 85% of the work, they were a pain... but at least I could demonstrate to the client that I was truly a one stop shop from mastering to cover design. Pretty funny.) And I'm pretty sure the guy said they generally never needed the PQ list. But, it's been a while.


*Coincidentally, I hadn't upgraded my SF since version 5. But I saw last night where Sony was selling upgrades from ANY version of SF to SF 8 for only a hundred bucks US (thru 4/15) and throwing in CD- Architect (and I think they'll be bundled from here on out, but don't bet the farm on it). I'd also owned CD Architect in the pre-XP version and was anxious to get an up to date version, so, this was jelly.

Yeah, Wavelab does the PQ code thing really well. I'm looking for a more after-the-fact sort of deal. I've sent masters off and they didn't comeback with it. Grrrr. . .

[theblue1]

Are you saying your mastering engineer didn't include a PQ list?

CD-Architect can also read the subcodes from a burned CD and you could then output the PQ list as described above; I would imagine Wavelab can do something like that, too.

[chadly]

Originally Posted by theblue1

Are you saying your mastering engineer didn't include a PQ list?

CD-Architect can also read the subcodes from a burned CD and you could then output the PQ list as described above; I would imagine Wavelab can do something like that, too.

No no, my ME that I use always includes a PQ list. To be honest, the clients I work with handle it from the ME to the plant. I had a personal project that went to the plant, so this is really the first time I've had to deal with them. Everything that I sent out came back (art proofs, master, etc.) EXCEPT the PQ list. I thought that it was kind of weird, now I'm wondering about how to generate a new one. (I don't remember if I copied the original PQ sheet before I sent it off )

I know that Wavelab lays out PQ sheets really well when it's burning the CD (and this is on a older version where I work at, BTW, not the most current version) but I haven't been able to generate an accurate PQ sheet from a CD that wasn't originated in the software. Maybe I need to look further, but I don't think it does. I'll have to research CD architect. I remember playing with that years ago and thought it worked really well!

[alphajerk]

the DIY kinda manufacturers dont give a shit.

[theblue1]

Since I only got CD-A yesterday and it's been at least about 3 or 4 years since I used the previous version (I got tied of waiting for the XP upgrade -- and wasn't trying to market myself as an ME, anyhow) I decided to check this issue out a little farther.

Good News: CD Architect does extract PQ lists and subcodes from audio CDs.

And it seems to work great on my laptop --- on CD's (previously) created on this laptop. Commercial CD's and burned CD's from my other burner or previous burners or a couple pals Mac-burned audio disks returned 'unknown' disk errors.

Now, I'm thinking that in my enthusiasm to rid my machine of unnecessary services a couple weeks ago that I sort of cut a little too far and got some CD helper app. Certainly, I do know I knocked out the 'transparent' CD-buring utility that the Beast of Redmond has in WIndows. Sometimes you don't miss your helper services til your well runs dry. Or something.

Anyhow, I'm pretty much willing to blame the partial success on my own set up and not CD-Arch.

And, of course, even under my peculiar circumstances, I'd apparently be able to extract a PQ list from anything I'd burned on this machine. But, you know, that's not good enough and I'll have to get to the bottom of it sooner rather than later. One issue I seem to recall is that you need to have a more or less current .NET framework on your machine and while I think I do -- it's not something I necessarily pay a lot of attention to right now. (I don't have any .NET project myself at this instant, but it's knock, knock, knockin', it don't pay to sleep at the switch for niche dwellers like me.)

So, my problems notwithstanding, it looks like a proper install of CD-Architect should do the job.

BTW -- there's a DEMO of CD-Architect at the Sony site (30 Day) so you could even check it out. Sorry I didn't think of it sooner. Sony

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by alphajerk

the DIY kinda manufacturers dont give a shit.

That's my thinking (about PQ list requirements).

And, by and large, the main complaint I hear about low end rep houses is graphics, either on the CD or the booklet (if it's even printed by them) -- or both.

I think the 1's and 0's by and large take care of themselves pretty well for basic projects these days. At least that's my suspicion.


And I really do suspect that some good, even service-oriented replicators have things like PQ list requirements not only out of a desire to document and double-check, but also to discourage first-time and DIY-oriented customers who might otherwise require so much handholding that an already low-margin job becomes a money looser and gets in the way of daily production.

When Joe DIY calls up Sid's Bargain Replicators, PO Box 99, Nowheresville, ND, 1000 retail-ready pkgs* for $699 (*see tiny, unreadable note at bottom of ad), he probably figures he's not going to get the velvet rope treatment. If not, one blast of NYC-level do ya want me to sit and chat on the phone with you all day or do you want me to get your job out sarcasm should straighten Joe right out.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by alphajerk

...could one say create a image on a MAC and burn a CD on that then xfer over the image to a pc and have it check the disc vs the image?

Plextools measures the raw errors on the disk using the drive's error correction circuitry. You just burn a disk on the Mac and then put it in the PeeCee to test it.

I found the PeeCee a lot more friendly than I remember from years ago. So much so that I've moved most of my audio work to the PeeCee and just use my Mac for accounting, e-mail, etc.

[theblue1]

I don't know if you're kidding or not... but I bust'd out laughing when I got to the accounting part!


Let that be testimony to the truism: one size never fits all.

[alphajerk]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Plextools measures the raw errors on the disk using the drive's error correction circuitry. You just burn a disk on the Mac and then put it in the PeeCee to test it.

I found the PeeCee a lot more friendly than I remember from years ago. So much so that I've moved most of my audio work to the PeeCee and just use my Mac for accounting, e-mail, etc.

thats strange... i find the PC better for what you are using your mac for lol...

but good to know.... i think i will research it further [i got people wanting me to master now so i guess i better learn eh?]

btw, i have been using both apple and pc since they BOTH booted via MSdos... i have no preference of one vs the other except the software [for audio and video] i use happens to be mac.

and fwiw, XP is pretty good. only had to reinstall once so far

[Bob Olhsson]

I've been using a Mac since 1985. I'm not interested in buying new software to do stuff my Mac does just fine using my 1987 software.

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

I've been using a Mac since 1985. I'm not interested in buying new software to do stuff my Mac does just fine using my 1987 software.

Right on, Bob, and (if it's properly optimized which I've no doubt it is) it probably does everything just as fast now as it did then.

We don't always need the fastest, newest to do what we need to do.


That said, there's a whole new world of capabilities in the new Macs and PCs...

[alphajerk]

1987!?! wow, vintage... email software from 87, did they have that?

[chadly]

Originally Posted by theblue1

Since I only got CD-A yesterday and it's been at least about 3 or 4 years since I used the previous version (I got tied of waiting for the XP upgrade -- and wasn't trying to market myself as an ME, anyhow) I decided to check this issue out a little farther.

Good News: CD Architect does extract PQ lists and subcodes from audio CDs.

And it seems to work great on my laptop --- on CD's (previously) created on this laptop. Commercial CD's and burned CD's from my other burner or previous burners or a couple pals Mac-burned audio disks returned 'unknown' disk errors.

Now, I'm thinking that in my enthusiasm to rid my machine of unnecessary services a couple weeks ago that I sort of cut a little too far and got some CD helper app. Certainly, I do know I knocked out the 'transparent' CD-buring utility that the Beast of Redmond has in WIndows. Sometimes you don't miss your helper services til your well runs dry. Or something.

Anyhow, I'm pretty much willing to blame the partial success on my own set up and not CD-Arch.

And, of course, even under my peculiar circumstances, I'd apparently be able to extract a PQ list from anything I'd burned on this machine. But, you know, that's not good enough and I'll have to get to the bottom of it sooner rather than later. One issue I seem to recall is that you need to have a more or less current .NET framework on your machine and while I think I do -- it's not something I necessarily pay a lot of attention to right now. (I don't have any .NET project myself at this instant, but it's knock, knock, knockin', it don't pay to sleep at the switch for niche dwellers like me.)

So, my problems notwithstanding, it looks like a proper install of CD-Architect should do the job.

BTW -- there's a DEMO of CD-Architect at the Sony site (30 Day) so you could even check it out. Sorry I didn't think of it sooner. Sony

CD Architect works beautifully! Thanks for the heads up. Why did it ever go away in the first place!?!

Many thanks.

[theblue1]

Glad it worked out for you!

I wondered the same thing, myself. Since I paid over 300 clams for it and was, shall we say, more than a little discouraged when an XP version took at least a couple years (if not more) to get out.

I thought it was really fun mastering a CD for replication (scary fun, mind you) and CD Architect made it pretty close to as easy as I could imagine (given the hardware restraints of the mid-late 90s) Although it was pretty easy, anyhow, since, by and large the client was really happy with the mixes (done elsewhere).

We did a couple minor touch ups; made one track recorded at a different studio than the rest match a little better. Probably the hardest thing we did was set song-to-song levels, but I was glad for the client there, he had a pretty good sense of how they should play out.

You know, I offered to to put some trick PQ code stuff in, maybe just some crossfades for that concept album feel, but, you know, those bluegrass guys just don't want to get freaky...


Ultimately, though, not having CDA didn't end up being all that big a deal because I stopped soliciting audio work and got more serious about database work -- and, anyway, the online music thing really slowed people down from leap-of-faith CD projects.

But, anyhow, kudos (whatever they are, I looked it up once but...) to Sony for making more-than-good on that now-long-ago service-shortfall from Sonic Foundry. I was ticked off then but I'm happy now. (Or at least I will be when I figure out why I can only extract subcodes from disks I burned on this machine.)

[jamesp]

[QUOTE=chadlyWhile this thread is going, is there any software out there (PC or Mac, pref PC) that can generate the paperwork that you send in with a master to the plant? Sort of like Wavelab, only after the fact? Mastering guys know what I'm talking about if I'm not being too clear.[/QUOTE]

I just thought I'd mention that Plextools XL can now produce a complete disc report automatically - giving you a disc layout together with a C1/C2 error plot and a beta/jitter plot. If you use Plextools to burn the disc then, in most cases, it can also verify that the data on the disc is identical to the source.

Cheers.

James.

[chadly]

Originally Posted by jamesp

I just thought I'd mention that Plextools XL can now produce a complete disc report automatically - giving you a disc layout together with a C1/C2 error plot and a beta/jitter plot. If you use Plextools to burn the disc then, in most cases, it can also verify that the data on the disc is identical to the source.

Cheers.

James.

I don't think that the PQ info on XL is quite right. I took a project that I did in Wavelab and compared it to the info on XL and it didn't work. The gap between tracks was never accurately reported. Not a bad program otherwise! Perhaps this was a limitation of the demo of plextools XL. Anyone else have any insight?

Chad

[jamesp]

Originally Posted by chadly

I don't think that the PQ info on XL is quite right. I took a project that I did in Wavelab and compared it to the info on XL and it didn't work. The gap between tracks was never accurately reported. Not a bad program otherwise! Perhaps this was a limitation of the demo of plextools XL. Anyone else have any insight?

Chad

Can you give me the details, preferably the PQ information produced by each program? I have a contact at Plextor who would probably like to know if there are problems.

Cheers.

James.