Audio CD-R's versus regular CD-R's?

Music CD-Rs have SCMS copy protection encoded in the disc so a copy cannot be made of the copy, and "consumer grade" CD burners can only use this type of CD-R. This is why SCMS CD-Rs are more expensive. Pro CD burners and computer CD burners can use regular CD-Rs and make multiple copies.

As to brand and quality, some swear by Matsui, but I use Maxell and Sony with a Marantz Pro CD Burner with excellent results. There are only a few factories world wide that can make CD-Rs, so regardless of the brand you choose, the blank was made at one of these factories. I do avoid the real cheap CD-R blanks though as I'm hoping the major, ie Sony, can have some influence on quality control. Use 1X or 2X copy speed for best results. Good Luck. Craig

Buy your music; stealing is stealing. How will your favorite artists make a living if no one is willing to pay for their work? "It's an industry problem, let them deal with it"? "the musicians make enough touring to support themselves"? Not when the concert halls are half full thanks to the recession we're in (we're in denial). Until "the music industry" comes up with an equitable solution then you ought to support the people that make music with your hard-earned greenbacks. The traditional way, buy the music. I make compilation CD's of my own all the time (casual listening in the car etc), the difference is I paid for the music in the first place. If we are all here for the love of the music, then you really ought to reconsider how you support the folks that make the music. Megabuck rigs with no new software? No thanks.

To answer your question, the manufacturer of the blanks doesn't seem to make much difference, but like Craig pointed out, burn the music you own at 1x speed.

bravo jeff, anyone that wants a cheap disc,be it vinyl or cd can find it(used)on ebay for pennies on the dollar...search long enough and the deal of the century will come up, with the proper revenue paid to the artist.

garfish is right, a music cd-r is incripted, a revenue paid to the record industry is the blame for the higher price.

imho, my dell burning a disc at quasi speed won't come near the quality of my 1:1 phillips 950 audio burner

Jeff, I take offence - I burn tons of CD's - mainly 50's & 60's Jazz, and Blues artists, who unfortunately have been on the wrong side of the grass for years - still the record companys expect us to pay a premium, obscenely high price for $ 0.15 worth of shiny plastic. Where are the royalties going anyway? Who stealing from whom? Heck, how many times is the general public expected to re-purchase their collections with the latest 20 bit, 24 bit, super remastered & expanded versions, whatever, of their favorite recordings. Have you counted the number of new, supposedly superior versions of Miles Davis' 'Birth of the Cool', there has been in the last few years. I purchased the entire David Bowie back catalogue that was remastered (by Rhino, I think) a couple of years ago, now they've just re-released his entire old catalogue again. Big 5 marketing gone amuk.
Anyways, I enjoy, and value your input - keep up the good work Jeff.

Get the standard ones - there's no general difference save for the royalty charge and use-prevention code to go with it. Consumer-market standalone audio CD-R burners/players don't permit the use of such computer disks because they look for the proper code before recognizing the disk, but the pro-market audio machines and of course PC-burners ignore the code, and so should you.

BTW, Dogeatpuppy, how do you figure that purchasing used records or CD's gives royalty payments to artists? Sure, they might have gotten a payment from whoever bought the disk new, but that's the same as the case where Hamiltonmktg borrows the 'store-bought' disk from his friend and copies it.