Re: [ARSCLIST] Memorex CDs

[Mike Richter <mrichter@xxxxxxx>]

Don Cox wrote:
> On 12/01/06, Joe_Iraci@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>
> > The truth is that CD-R discs can fail in a 2 to 5 year lifetime, if:
> > -very poor quality cheap brands are used -metal reflective layer is
> > not gold -phthalocyanine dye is not used -recorded with a high error
> > rate initially (because of recording speed too high or poor
> > disc-burner compatibility) -poor storage conditions -poor handling
> > -an unexpected disaster (fire,etc.)
>
>
> It is not as easy as it should be to find or set the best speed for a
> particular batch of CDs with a particular burner. There is no equivalent
> of the test strip used for normal photographic proceses.

Certainly there is. CDSpeed and CD/DVD Diagnostic and Inspector are 
potent tools for measuring error rates; Media Sciences measures many 
components for a thorough analysis.

> Manufactured CDs are much less likely to change than burned CDs.

Not necessarily. Major and minor publishers have used inks which 
corroded the discs. In addition, I have seen arguments that the life of 
a well recorded CD-R should exceed that of a commercial recording. 
Frankly, I find that unpersuasive: we know neither lifetime reliably so 
any assertion that one is longer than the other strikes me as compound 
guesswork.

> Including CDs that cannot be read with standard players today.

A disc compliant with the red book and well written can be read in any 
player compliant with the standard. That publishers produce discs more 
or less seeming to be compliant is interesting but hardly relevant; I've 
a plastic magnifier packaged as though an LP.

> The problem is to balance medium life against storage space and cost. 

Just so.

Mike
--
mrichter@xxxxxxx
http://www.mrichter.com/