CD32 - burned roms damage laser?

[humble worm]

I was told that burning roms for CD32 is not very good idea as they use the device up much sooner than original roms (different production technology or something )

true or false?

[Graham Humphrey]

Not really a thread for OT so I've moved it

[alexh]

Do you mean CD-R?

[humble worm]

yep

[Heavy Stylus]

I would say that this is false. I have no proof, but I can't think of any reason why using CDR's in a CD32 would shorten the life of the unit (as long as good CDR's are used and burnt at a low speed).

[Shoonay]

I'm with HS on this one, the exact same myth was floating around the PSX glory days - mine works to this day and I used to "feed it" will all kinds of CD types: from a few originals to hundreds of really really REALLY cheap CDR's...

[AmigaFriend]

Well when i bought my first CD writer in 1998, only the yellow cd-r were read by the cd32. (audio cd's on this case)

Then with the industry improving the quality of the media, the cd32 started to accept almost any kind of media, without complaining. I've sticked with tdk, and sony discs and after 10 years of reading almost exclusively with cd-r media, she is still here with good ealth. So, by my expirience...

My CD32 was bought in 1993, just to reference.

[Retro-Nerd]

I own several CD consoles and all working fine, and i have a lot of burned games for them. This "Burned CDRs damage a console" rumors are still strong, but i don't care about it. All consoles die one day, it's normal.

[humble worm]

the guy who said that was telling something about differences between technology - manner in which data was hmmm.. "placed" in CD rom in early 90's and the way it is done now with our cd/dvd recorders...

not sure if this would be an accurate translation, but he said something about... density

anyway, thanks everyone for your answers

Originally Posted by Retro-Nerd

All consoles die one day, it's normal.

yeah, everything flows, carpe diem, memento mori etc

[AmigaFriend]

Originally Posted by humble worm

not sure if this would be an accurate translation, but he said something about... density

Maybe he was referring about tolerances? To put 700MB data on a originally designed format of 650MB?

[Dizzy]

try googling it. give a lot of links, Found this

Rumors of laser damage from silver discs may be from the same sources that report that Elvis is still alive. Any CD reflects only a fraction of the incident laser power, and most of that is directed to the photodetector. The amount of reflected light that returns to the laser is very small compared to the intensity that it initially generated. Neither silver, gold, nor aluminum metal layers can harm the lasers in drives. But each metal is different.

from http://www.mscience.com/faq54.html

[rkauer]

Yes, they reflect differently.

It can cause premature failure of the lens/laser. But only with very bad media.

Oh, using a DVD to record CD-R is nor exactly a good thing, since the DVD laser is a lot narrow than the fuzziest CD laser. It will "force" the CD set to push harder to read.

Anyway, even on the worst case scenario, expect a short out on the lifespan of 20%. I.E. : if the unit will last 2,000 hours, it will last "only" 1600...

Get the picture?

[Calgor]

I thought most CD-Rs were less reflective than pressed ones, hence I would have thought using the above logic if it is due to the power of the laser, it may even lengthen the life :P Unless the cdreader increases the power of the laser when it can't read properly.

I take it the CD32 cannot read any CDRWs as they are even less reflective. The silver CDRs were said to be more reflective than the Gold CDRs.

Although if it is less reflective, maybe there would be more errors causing more rereads or error corrections (hence more work) by the cd player.....

@rkauer
Interesting, I never thought of that! I just thought that the newer DVD writers had better quality lasers and firmware than the older writers and hence would make cleaner (even though narrower) burns. Maybe the quality of the burn may offset the narrowness?

[rkauer]

The colour of the reflective is not important.

Yes, they are lots and lots of grades of reflection. Industrial medias are the worst (35~40% TOPS!), followed by cheap audio brands (40~45%), then very good ones (the colour not matter, always around 55%) to pressed CDs (70%).

The lenses always adjust the power applied when they can't read the information on the media.

And guess what is the worst enemy of a CD reader? Dust!!! Even a small particle of dust in the right (wrong) spot can ruin a reader in short time. That's why the units always read the CD inside a "caped" unit, only when the lid is closed (please ask again and I'll try to explain in better english, I'm drunk!).

[humble worm]

Originally Posted by rkauer

Get the picture?

kind of

Now as I read Calgors post I recall... the guy said that the device has to perform more work while reading CD-R than it would reading pressed one. I have to ask him to explain exactly what his point was

[Retro-Nerd]

Originally Posted by humble worm

kind of

... the guy said that the device has to perform more work while reading CD-R than it would reading pressed one.

Maybe, but that happens too when you use original games with a frequent read access.

[Fingerlickin_B]

Originally Posted by rkauer

Oh, using a DVD to record CD-R is nor exactly a good thing, since the DVD laser is a lot narrow than the fuzziest CD laser.

Most interesting!

So I gather what you saying is that the track width is all about hardware only, so when writing a CD with DVD drive you get thinner "DVD-style" tracks, but spread over the same amount of disc space?

I need to try some re-burn some CD32 titles that never worked for me...which I burned with a DVD drive...now just need to find my old CD writing drive!

PZ.

[Calgor]

Also keep in mind there is software (i.e. kprobe) to test for burn quality by scanning a CD/DVD drive by reporting the number of soft/hard errors. But of course the cd32 cannot run this software :P And it will report different results depending on match of drive and media.

@rkauer

But hang on, does not a DVD writer use 2 separate lasers to read/write for CD and DVD that operate at different wavelengths? I take it the shorter DVD wavelength produces narrower tracks? (I thought maybe it was just shorter pits for DVDs greater storage, not necessarily narrower). Any good URLs when you are sober?

[OddbOd]

Frankly I'm unmoved by rkauer's assertions, he might be right in theory but practically speaking I would need to see some hard facts before being convinced either way.

Originally Posted by Calgor

But hang on, does not a DVD writer use 2 separate lasers to read/write for CD and DVD that operate at different wavelengths?

Correct, usually 780nm for CDs (infrared) and 635/650nm for DVDs (red visible), this is to maintain compatibility with CD-Rs as the red DVD laser is not suitable for burnt discs. Some DVD Video players cannot play CD-Rs for precisely this reason.

A little extra info to confuse and amuse, the laser spot size at the disc's surface is identical for both CDs and DVDs (~1mm), how can that be?

Originally Posted by Calgor

I take it the shorter DVD wavelength produces narrower tracks?

Right again, well partly The refractive effect of the substrate is also different because DVDs consist of two 0.6mm substrates bonded together - a dummy layer in the case of single layer discs, semi transparent for dual layer - rather than CDs which are a single 1.2mm substrate.

The higher data density is due to both the reduced track width of a DVD (0.74 microns vs 1.6 microns for CDs) and the minimum pit length which is twenty times less than that of CDs.

To learn more a good place to start is DVD Demystified by Jim Taylor.

[Paul_s]

I know on some older CD players from the early 90s that CD-R's and the like cause premature failure to the laser with it having to increase the power to read the disc. (this coming from the tech department who service them)

Most CD players these days though are designed for it so not much of an issue.