2. digital
  3. 154863-122613

Bits Are Bits, Right?

So I'm currently heading down the path of exploring which CD-Rs sound best in my CD player, along with what burn speeds sound best and what CD burners make the best CDs. I already know from my research that the more accurately the pits are placed on the CD (e.g. less jitter in the recorded data), the better chance I stand at getting the CD to sound good. There is a counter-argument to this idea that goes something like this: "Bits are bits and as long as the CD player can read them, the accuracy of the spacing doesn't matter because everything is thrown into a buffer which removes the effect of any jitter written into the data during burning." I know I don't agree with that logic, but for the life of me I can't remember the technical reasons. I know I used to know. Haha! 

So who here knows why buffers don't solve all of our problems in the digital realm? How come timing accuracy matters in the stages before the data buffer?
128x128mkgus
uberwaltz's avatar
uberwaltz
13,381 posts
 
Pretty sure someone here dident……..
lalitk's avatar
lalitk
5,382 posts
 
+2, @ozzy62.

Please don’t let this thread turn into digital vs. Vinyl never ending debate.  I see couple of vinyl fanboys already chimed in....they just can’t help themselves spewing their hatred for digital.

“I was driving down the road with a friend when they plugged the phone into the car and the sound quality was much better than usual. I asked what they did, and I found out they were playing songs off the phone’s “hard drive,” whereas I am usually streaming from Tidal. Same data, way different sound”.

@mkgus,

The SQ of a track greatly depends on source of master file, listen to ‘Hotel California’ from Hotel California 40th Anniversary Expanded Edition (2017) album first, then listen to the same song from Hell Freezes Over (Remaster 2018) album.

Looking forward to your feedback!
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
uber, are you looking in the mirror? Eat more fish.
uberwaltz's avatar
uberwaltz
13,381 posts
 
GK
Sorry but no mirrors in my house......

Lalitk.

Totally agree, nice post!
mkgus's avatar
mkgus OP
324 posts
 
I agree, the source file is all important. Different remasters no doubt sound different. In my car example, I’ve repeated the test several times. When I play the track from my phone’s memory, it sounds better than streaming even with the example same version of the song. The most noticeable part is the bass. From the phone, the bass is much more like a quick “punch,” and when streaming it’s more of a quick “shove,” if that makes sense. “Tighter, faster bass” might be a metaphor I could use.

Last night I copied one of my favorite CDs to a black CD-R and the difference in sound quality between the 2 discs was quite apparent. The treble was much more laid back and “tamed.” I could hear micro-details better. It’s too early to conclude which version is better as they both have their pros and cons. I’m interested in the “why.” Does one disc have more read errors than the other? If not, then I conclude that the way the data (the exact same data, that is) is arranged on the disc matters. The precision of the pit spacing, the width and depth of the pits, and the material of construction of the CDs may play a role. If it’s all the same data and the read errors are minimal, then what is happening before the buffer is having effect on the sound.
More to discover