Only time will tell for how long head units will last till they blow up!!! For those who bought the 2000 and have been using CD-R's since day one and that is all they use I am supprised that some haven't crapped out already!

Though most who listen to CD-R's bigger stereo's and new head units go hand in hand most of the time.

 

I haven't had any problems with the factory head or the aftermarket Kenwood in the Honda or in my Nissan or any other CD player ever for that matter. I find when unit doesn't like a CD-r it's the brand of disc rather than the player.

 

Intersting news Pinky. I've been listening to a lot of CD-R's lately in my car. I wonder if the brand of brining software that you use to cerate the CD-R makes a difference.

 

I don't want to start speculating I am just relaying the info that I was told. The issue with different CD-R's working and not working has to do with the lazer eye pickup. Never radios had better pickups but still had older motors. New CD-R compatable radio's have beefed up motors.

If all radio's were CD-R compatable then why do some lines only have one or 2 radios that say CD-R compatable and not all of them! I have seen lines like Clarion which at one point had only 1 radio that was CD-R compatable. Now they have a few that do. Though really missed the boat!!!!

 

Interesting observation, Pinky. Most of the CD players I've seen that specify "compatibility" refer specifically to CD-RW. I know of a few instances of CD-R's not working in CD players, but it seems to be pretty rare compared to the number that do work. I actually have a Sony CD Walkman from many years ago (probably one of the first 2 years it was available, and many years before CD-R's were available) that plays CD-R's with no problem. One issue I have seen is with CD-R's that are burned at a very high speed (10x, 12x or higher) For some reason, I have seen folks have problems playing these CD-R's, but it's usually in another PC's CD-ROM/DVD combo drive. But in my experience, most CD players seem to play CD-R's OK. (most will *NOT* play CD-RW's however) I definitely agree, though, that the few instances I've seen of not playing are on older players.

** Oops, after typing that all up, I re-read Pinky's first post and see that he was referring to the damage that is done by the CD-R's, not necessarily that they won't play at all. Sorry about that Pinky. But, I have been playing CD-R's almost exclusively in the above mentioned Sony CD Walkman for over 3 years (probably 15 hours of playing time per month), and there doesn't seem to be any damage thus far. But that by no means is "scientific proof" that it couldn't or wouldn't happen. As the legal mumbo-jumbo so aptly states...."your results may vary"**

 

This is false information, and yes, I'm positive. I'm positive, because CD players use CLV (Constant Linear Velocity) controllers for the play motors. I hope I get the explanation correct.

With CLV, the rotation speed of the disk changes based on how close to the center of the disk the data is. For tracks near the center, the disk rotates faster, and for data on the outside, the disk rotates slower. The purpose of CLV is to ensure a constant data rate regardless of where on the disk the data is being accessed. Because less data can fit on the inside tracks, the disk needs to rotate faster for these areas.

As a caveat, some of the newer drives showing up on the market today are using CAV (Constant Angular Velocity), but I cannot say at the moment whether this is limited only to computer CD drives or not. I would not, however, that you could not read a CAV disk in a CLV player (and vice versa) unless the drive supports both modes (read, more expensive).

The advantage of CAV is that it is much simpler to design and produce because the motor doesn't need to change speed. In addition, CLV runs into problems for very high-speed CD-ROMs because there's a brief latency whenever the drive needs to change the rotational speed. Since the car players are only single-speed (i.e., 1x and not 12x, 16x, 24x high-speed PC drives), this latency problem is a non-issue.


{Edit}
I meant to add in something about some models in a family not supporting CD-Rs. This is only a speculation on my part, but it is/was most likely due to economics. This part isn't speculation, but fact...CD-Rs require a higher wattage laser than standard pre-cut CDs due to the types of dyes used in CD-Rs (they reflect less light). So if a player is using a cheaper (and therefore, less powerful) laser, it will not be able to read the CD-Rs dye layer reliably...hence, the CD-R fails to work.

I've said this in the past...you cannot hurt a player with CD-Rs any more than you can with standard pre-cut CDs, period.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MacGyver
[B]This is false information, and yes, I'm positive.

 

Hi Guys...

Just thought you may all want to see some real data on the differances between cd and cd-r discs.

firstly why not checkout :-

http://www.yangkun.com/CDR/redbook.shtml


and then also take a look at:-


http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq.html

I have written this in a number of sections.

1. Disc formats/Data on Discs.
2. Data errors on discs.
3. Laser strength.




1. Disc formats/Data on Discs.

The bottom line is that the data on a cd or cd-r is stored on the disc in exactly the same way....

There are some subtle differences... which I will try to paraphrase now.......

If you go and buy a cd from a record store it will conform to a standard... this standard is the "red book" or IEC908 standard. This was writen by Sony and Philips in 1980.


If you create a cd-r it will confom to a different standard...

This is the Orange Book standard, and there are some subtle differences between this and Red Book. these are:-

"In 1988, the Orange Book specification (Was this ratified by the IEC? If so, what's the number?) for CD-WO (CD Write Once), or CD-R (CD Recordable) was released. The Orange Book specification added two extra areas to the CD (Can anyone tell me WHERE they're located PHYSICALLY?), named the Power Calibration Area (PCA) and the Program Memory Area (PMA). The PCA is used by the CD-R writer to calibrate the power of the laser on it each time the disc is to be written to (up to 99 times, since a maximum of 99 tracks are allowed). The PMA holds the temporary TOC until the permanent TOC is fixated."

quote taken from http://www.yangkun.com/CDR/redbook.shtml[I]

So a cd-r has a couple of extra bits that a normal cd (Red Book) dosn't

Now this is where we need to get things in to perspective......these different areas are tiny! and only ever read once. In fact the PMA is only ever read if the TOC hasn't been firmed up (the disc closed).

The way the data is written to the data area on the disk (50mm from the center onwards) is the same no matter red book or orange book.

Therefore in relation to the differances in data written I would suggest that this is not the reason for an increased number of failures of head units.


2. Data errors on discs.

(apologies if I sound patronising, but I'm just trying to explain it simply)
Data errors on cd's are a fact of life......period. The question is how bad are they, and can they be recovered. The answer to these questions is mostly yes......


CD has a neat feature of being able to play even when scratched, and for the most part we never "hear" the difference. This is due to some pretty neat stuff.

1. all the samples on a cd are mixed up and not stored in a logical progression. eg lets say we have a 10 samples.

if we were to store them in a serial fasion on a disc they would look like this.....

sample 1, sample 2, sample 3, etc etc etc.

CD dosn't do this, it jumbles them up so no two sequential samples are ever together eg:-

sample 1, sample 6, sample 3, sample 7, sample 5 etc etc etc.......

this is to lesson the chances of any two sequential samples being trashed, by dust, dirt, scratches etc......

The reason for this is the cddrive itself has some choices when it comes to handling errors.

These are:-

Sample and hold. (uses the last good sample, and trys to find another good one) usually ends up as being an audiable click.

Linear interpolation (looks at the samples either side of the bad one and uses a value in the middle) usually unaudiable

resample. (uses the last good sample untill another good one comes along) ends up sounding like a stuck record.

Mute When all else fails shutdown..(should be used on all Britany Spears albums)


Exactly how the player handles these problems will depend on the make and the price of the drive, however the player does not spin faster, as this would just increase the chances of finding an error.

(this is demonstrated by getting an AOL CDROM drilling two big (10mm holes somewhere near the center of the data area and then trying to copy the whole disk to your hard drive.....what you will hear is your cdrom slowing down when it comes to the holes or data errors)

Therefore I would suggest that this is not the cause of failures in head units and also suggest that a CD transport when playing cd-r's does not spin faster than when playing normal (red book) cd's


3. Laser strength.

Cd-r's need a higher power of laser to operate. this wil output more heat. However this increase is so tiny in relation to it's environment that is can be discounted. Things such as having the heater on and weather conditions are likley to have far greater influance over the heat of the unit than the laser output.

I would also discount this as a reason for the failures.

So to summarise there are differances between cd and cd-r but they are so small in real terms that the liklelyhood of their use causing an increased number of failures is at the very best less than remote. It is much more likely that a bad batch of components or somthing similar, or perhaps even luck is the cause. Many different brands use transports from a single supplier eg sony/phillips so a bad batch from either could have far reaching implications over many brands..

So, sorry to have waffled on for hours, but I hope it helps two smart people avoid another "discussion"


Cheers

Mark.

 

For crying out loud, Pinky, why does this have to be another attack? You made a very pointed statement, and I'm merely saying why it cannot be true. Nothing personal, just setting the facts straight!

Mark pointed out in more detail my two main points, which DIRECTLY go against what you are claiming.

1) FACT: CDs and CD-Rs spin at the same rate when compared together at the same linear distance form the center of the CD.
CONCLUSION: CD-Rs do NOT make the motor spin any differently than standard CDs. Hence, THIS cannot be the cause of motors wearing out while using CD-Rs.

2) FACT: CD-Rs require more power to create and read than standard CDs.
CONCLUSION: If the laser doesn't have the power, the CD-R cannot be read.

ALL of your sources for EVERY argument you bring to the table are "very reliable". I would think after having so many of your "facts" proven incorrect by either real sources or actual experiments you would stop jumping down my throat every time I correct you. Stop attacking people when they disagree and pay attention to what they're trying to say for once.

This discussion should now be over, as the "fact" you brought up has been shown to be impossible. Yet, I'm sure you're going to argue how great and reliable your sources are and continue to argue how you're correct. Cripes, get some better sources...your current ones are obviously a few bricks short of a full wheelbarrow.

And if you need PROOF of what Mark and I have just disproven, get the Orange and Red Book Standards (anyone can get them) and prove it to yourself. Next time, try to approach an issue as a question, as in "Do CD-Rs have any information on them that could change the read speed?". If you had done that, Mark and I could have answered with a simple explanation, and be done with it...instead, you come off looking like a raving lunatic who has blinders on to anything but what follows your narrow view of the world. Part of being a good scientist is knowing when to listen instead of screaming how great your conclusions are and how great your sources are and how great this is and how great that is.

So you see a lot of players come back with the motors burned out, big deal. Do you also count all of the players that DON'T burn out but still use CD-Rs every day, such as my player? No, because those don't end up in your shop. I would bet good money you see a burned out motor, ask the people if they listen to CD-Rs, they say "yes", and you scream how they screwed up the radio by doing such a horrible thing.

Switch to decaf and lighten up....the board is here to determine what information is correct and what isn't. It doesn't help when you try to bury someone because they disagree with you. You keep asking everyone to prove that CD-Rs DON'T burn up the motors....can you provide proof that they DO? I didn't think so. I'm not the LONE ranger and I don't sit up on my high horse...I sit at the level of evryone else and discuss items. If anyone sits on their high horse, it's YOU...accept the FACT that not EVERYTHING people tell you is true...try looking up the information for yourself for a change before screaming it ti the world as fact. And no, manufacturer websites are not the correct place for info most of the time...they're usually there for one thing and one thing only...to promote THEIR product.

 

Mark,

Some questions on the CD format, if you know the answers...in particular, the PCA. When running the "test" portion of my CD burner program, I've had to scrap a number of CDs because I tested them too many times (did the "test, then burn" option, then killed it off during the testing phase). It wasn't 99...more like 4 or 5. When doing a closed-CD session, do you think the burner uses more than one track's worth of PCA to do its power test? If not, any ideas why the burner will refuse to cut a blank CD (other than a used PCA area) after it has been used as a test subject for only a handful of runs?

Also, as an anecdotal story, I ran into the odd sample interleaving issue when I first tried to look at the data coming from the pickup circuitry. I was trying my hardest to get the data to fit a music pattern, but it always seemed jumbled. It was MANY years later that I came across the actual format for the left/right sample interleaving scheme and error correction bits. I probably would have done better with a sine wave rather than music, but my debuggin skills were still in their infancy. Next time, I'll pick up the spec first