[Contents] [Previous Part]
[Postscript & References]
Since my previous article in February 1990, I am strongly
compelled to expose some CD myths that have been circulating
around. I would like to present some facts, and my own observations.
CD data recording is a purely digital system, with audio samples
supplemented by two layers of error correction and other control
information. No mechanical system is perfect, so the data read
from the disc is not always identical with what was recorded. In
fact, of the 7350 data blocks per second being decoded, even a
good player will find a few blocks per second with errors on a
good CD. I have measured this, and found that CD quality varies
enormously; from a block error rate (BER) of less than one per
second, up to hundreds per second. The same CD will generally
give similar results on different players. The CD standard
demands a maximum BER of 1/1000, or about 7 per second.
These errors may seem nasty, but all audio samples in bad blocks
are totally and completely repaired by the two error correction
systems. Of course the BER may get so high (above about 100 per
second) that the errors cannot be corrected. The CD player then
pulls a neat trick by doing an "interpolation". This is the
process of making a good estimation of what a bad audio sample
should be, based on its immediate neighbours. This is over a
very short time interval, say 20 microseconds, so the "fudged"
sample will go totally unnoticed by even the most discerning
listener.
On some CDs, the whole disc may be played without a single
interpolation occuring, so the audio samples were a perfect
reproduction of what was recorded on the CD master tape. Other
discs will have the occassional short burst of interpolations,
which can usually be aligned with manufacturing defects or
obvious marks such as bad scratches or anything larger than about
1/4 mm in size. Pock-marks in the surface are not as common as
they used to be, but I still see pin-holes in new discs. To
observe these, hold the disc close to a powerful incandescent
bulb and look through the disc metalisation; they are quite
obvious. The variation in thickness of the metal layer between
different discs can also be noticed, but I have not experienced
any correlation with error rates in this respect.
Finger prints and fine dust can affect the BER, but they don't
cause interpolations. Another interesting cause of errors is
slightly warped discs and imperfect seating of discs on the small
platter. These both overstress the laser focussing and fine
tracking servo mechanisms, so that the laser cannot quite be kept
in perfect position. I have operated player mechanisms out of
their cases in bright light with no effect on the BER; shooting
down the "green ring" brigade in flames. In fact my current
"home brew" player has the mechanism totally exposed.
Misaligned or warped discs can be easily spotted by watching the
image of light bounced off the top surface on to a wall or
ceiling. This cannot be done for discs with large printed
labels. I have improved the seating of discs on the platter (and
the BER) by cleaning the surfaces that mate with the inner part
of the disc with metho. It was amazing to see the size of
particle and quantity of dirt on the cotton bud after cleaning my
four year old player. I have also noticed CDs with holes that do
not perfectly fit the platter, allowing the minute amount of mis-
alignment to make the fine tracking servo work harder, and at
times affect the BER. On my player the fine tracking only has a
range of about 35 micrometres before the course motor driven
lateral tracking has to move the whole head, which gives an idea
of the tolerances involved.
It is surpring the amount of physical abuse an operating
mechanism will take before interpolations occur. It can be moved
all around at any angle with minimal changes in the BER.
Impulsive shocks are the worst; sharp finger tapping on the
mechanism will produce interpolations every time. I have also
operated by player on "lively" unbraced speaker cabinets with
little effect on the BER. Even with this relative immunity to
external vibration, I still think it is wise to play attention to
player damping and suspension of the mechanism.
All along, I have been talking about the effect on the BER of
physical things, and unless interpolations occur, all errors are
completely corrected and the digital sample reproduction is
perfect. Mild doses of interpolation are inaudible, but if it
does become chronic, a grainy caste begins to appear over the
music. When worse, it sounds like crickets chirping in the
background or like excess finger nail clicking on piano keys.
Depending on the player, it may give a loud click (like an LP) or
give up totally and stop playing. When this happens, you know
you have a bad disc. I have only every seen one disc like this.
Close monitoring showed it was interpolating almost continuously
through the whole disc, and a visual inspection showed hundreds
of pin holes. On one player, it was not even possible to skip
tracks.
I have no support for stick-on CD rings. They can produce no
audible effects, due to the nature of the digital system. I
cannot even see any valid reason why interpolation rates on bad
discs would be changed. The Armour-All treatment may have some
basis, but only as a cleaner of dirt and finger prints. It may
"fill" scratches, but should be polished off as much as possible.
I prefer to handle my discs very carefully by the edges, and
always keep them in closed cases when not being played. Dust
specks should preferably be removed with a photographer's type
"blower brush", and not any cleaning cloth, no matter how soft.
Hold a new disc up to a dim light so that the light bounces off
the unlabelled disc surface into your eyes. Notice the lack of
scratches. Now "polish" the disc with a cloth and look again.
You will probably find the surface is not as pristine as before.
While everyone in pondering the above, I am working on two more
articles to discuss the improvement of audio circuits in players,
and the two new "single bit" systems. *
* [I still haven't got around to writing these articles, so the
original readers have had plenty of time to ponder... GB, Oct '96]
[Contents] [Previous Part]
[Postscript & References]
Originally published in MAC Audio News No. 190, December 1990, pp 24-26.