On Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:06:08 -0500 (CDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the feedback, David.
> Neil wrote,
>
> | I then used my 709 to play a CD, and used the digital connection (thru
the
> | convertor) as input to my MT-16 and recorded it. However it didn't
record
> | any track marks (AUTO-MARK was set on the MT-16, but should be
irrelevant
> | for digital recordings).
>
> The CO3 is said to have the same problem. The subcode information from
which
> track mark locations are inferred is removed, so the recorder believes
that a
> single long track continues and continues.
I was thinking of getting the CO3 when I bought the CO2 - but I couldn't
find a need for the SCMS stuff, or additional connections, and the price
difference (nearly 4x the price of the CO2 here in England) swung it for me!
;-)
Probably a moot point for me, anyways - I'll elaborate later...
> | Is there any reason that people know, as to why my DVD / VCD / CD
player
> | wouldn't send track marks for audio CDs?
>
> First, you have to understand that there is no such thing as "sending a
track
> mark" or "receiving a track mark." They are only implied and inferred.
I thought there was such a beast - although it's debatable as to whether
it's implemented for these sort of transports.
I accept, though, that it may be normally achieved by more crude operations.
> Track divisions are reproduced in digital transfers when the subcode
indi-
> cates a change of source track number, a transition from out-of-track to
in-
> track, or a change of sampling rate (and probably for a change of source
me-
> dium code, but I've never had a way to isolate that from the other
reasons
> to mark a new track and test it all alone), the recorder marks a new
track.
> But there is no code or signal in S/PDIF that means "new track starts
now."
Not meaning to question you, uneccessarily - but is this definitely true? I
was sort of under the impression (hazy memory) that there was an instruction
that essentially meant "new track"?
> Most likely the DVD player is sending information from which track
division
> locations can be inferred, but the CO2 is stripping it out. If you
connected
> the coax out of your 709 to the coax in of your X5H without going through
> the CO2, you'd probably get proper track marks. That would be the first
> thing to try. If it works, then you know it's the CO2 and not the 709.
I tried this last night, as well as using my other portie (Aiwa F65)
connected to the optical out from the CO2 - neither produced track marks -
not even the direct connection of the coax out from the 709, to the coax in
on my X5H in source sync recording mode. So I'm fairly sure it's a question
of the 709 not producing any effects in the digital out stream that can be
interpreted as track marks.
This is consistent with my original gut feeling on this, and details gleaned
from historical debates I've seen on the subject.
> I assure you that there is nothing inherent in format conversion that
forces
> loss of that information: I've converted from optical to coax (and just
> thought of a way I could test going from coax to optical) with other
devices
> and the track marks were reproduced properly.
What are you using to convert, then? I assume not either the Midiman CO2 or
CO3, as you previously pointed out that you believe that both would
potentially strip out information that could be used to infer track changes.
I concur that it's not something that should be inherent in format
conversion - to be fair, I originally thought in this instance it wasn't
related to use of the CO2. But assuming that the Midiman CO2 and CO3 units
suffer from this particular quirk, is this simply an implementation thing -
I would have thought (there devices seeming to be quite simple) that all
that is really going on is simply pass-thru of the signal.
Cheers
Neil
_______________________________________________________
Say Bye to Slow Internet!
http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
