how to check if the cd is a red book? myths? sony cd architect

[Francis Vaughan]

Roughly I would say this is not so much a myth, as a test that doesn't preclude it being red book. The display of time between tracks is dependant upon the Q channel subcode. One suspects that this engineer felt that if the CD showed the existence of negative track time subcode information it had been created as a unified compliant disk image.

It is really a matter for the disk master process to decide whether to have the negative count in time codes, or other possibilities with the P&Q codes. There is no mandatory time space between tracks on a CD, you can have as short or as long as you like.

So, if the CD has negative lead-in counts it is almost certainly compliant, because to create them implies the use of a fully red-book aware process. But not having them does not mean you are not compliant.

[analographi]

Hi,
Thank you for you response. Interesting!

And how can I find out if a CD is RedBook standard?

[loujudson]

I am no expert, but I believe the Redbook spec does not include 80 minute CDs, so we have moved beyond redbook. Someone correect me if I'm wrong.

The countdown ONLY indicates that there a blank pauses between tunes, nothing else. If there is no space there will be no countdown.

I uas Jam on my Macs because it does make redbook CDs as I understand it - but one studio where macs are unknown tells me Jam does not make Redbook CDs. I send them out as masters and they come back as CDs... nobody complains!

Go figure! Someone needs ro go back and read the red book, and see what is true. And decide if it matters.

[8th_note]

Why do you care if the CD is Redbook compliant? Is your duplication vendor demanding that or is there some other reason?

I send them out as masters and they come back as CDs... nobody complains!

I use Roxio to burn my final master CDs. I don't know if they meet the Redbook standard. Roxio doesn't state anywhere that I can find if their program makes CDs to exactly Redbook specifications. I've had them duplicated and replicated by several different vendors and nobody's ever said a word. They just come back and they're fine.

[analographi]

Where I send them for printing (not burning) they demand it to be redbook

[cornutt]

Originally Posted by 8th_note

Why do you care if the CD is Redbook compliant?

Disks that aren't compliant may not work on some consumer CD players, although the ones made these days are a lot more tolerant than the older ones.

I'm guessing the main reason they insist on it is to prevent people who think they're smart (but aren't) from slipping non-compliant tricks for copy protection that cause a lot of problems for some consumers. E.g., the infamous pre-virused Sony disks, or the earlier copy-coded disks that physically damaged the early Pioneer Superdrives.

[RedWallStudio]

Originally Posted by cornutt

Disks that aren't compliant may not work on some consumer CD players, although the ones made these days are a lot more tolerant than the older ones.

I'm guessing the main reason they insist on it is to prevent people who think they're smart (but aren't) from slipping non-compliant tricks for copy protection that cause a lot of problems for some consumers. E.g., the infamous pre-virused Sony disks, or the earlier copy-coded disks that physically damaged the early Pioneer Superdrives.

Wow. I would highly disagree that newer players are more tolerant, I've seen the exact opposite. Newer players are made with the lowest common denominator parts and are built as cheaply as ever. I have no less than 6 CD/DVD players in my home studio (7 if you count my car and 11 if you count computers) and I can tell you which one is the oldest and which one is the newest just by which one is the most compatible. My oldest player (a first generation Sony) will play just about anything I throw at it, while my newest (a Bose) sometimes takes a half dozen tries and some coaxing to get it to play even store bought CDs.

[anguswoodhead]

I'm using Samplitude to burn Redbook Masters with no dramas.