Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Software which will use AAMQR? (Read 3804 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Software which will use AAMQR?

Forgive me if this is the wrong place to post this, as it's only my second post and my first real thread here.

This also may be an old/hard to answer question as it involves an end-of-life burner.

So here it is.  I have a Yamaha CRW-F1 burner, and as part of its feature set, they included a (as far as I know) proprietary technology for burning audio CDs which they called Advanced Audio Master Quality Recording.  "When Advanced Audio Master Recording Mode is enabled, the system widens the lands and pits during recording, significantly reducing jitter and improving audio and music recording quality to a level rivaling professionally prepared music CDs."

http://www.yamahamultimedia.com/yec/tech/aam_01.asp

When I burn CDs, I typically like to use this recording method, as I feel it produces not only a visible difference in terms of the space burned on (ie, more space taken up for the same data versus regular burning), but also I feel an audible difference as well.

Unfortunately, as far as I'm aware there are only two programs which support this method, Nero and Feurio.  Feurio is good, but I'd like to be able to try a lighter-weight program, such as Burrrn or BAO, or one with a more updated drive database (the latest, last? Feurio version is fairly dated now).

Does anyone know of any other software which supports this recording method on this particular drive?  Thanks in advance.

Software which will use AAMQR?

Reply #1 –
I'm curious about that feature (and other similar features to supposedly improve audio quality when burning), has anyone actually done a test to see if it makes an audible difference, and is not just due to placebo?

Software which will use AAMQR?

Reply #2 –
If there are any audible differences on a standalone CD player when playing back CD's that have been burned with either Yamaha's AMQR or Plextor's GigaRec (0.8x setting), these standalone devices are likely to be unable to handle burned media properly.

And ... no, there hasn't been any successful ABX'ing yet as far as I know ...
The name was Plex The Ripper, not Jack The Ripper

Software which will use AAMQR?

Reply #3 –
Quote
When I burn CDs, I typically like to use this recording method, as I feel it produces not only a visible difference in terms of the space burned on (ie, more space taken up for the same data versus regular burning), but also I feel an audible difference as well.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=364908"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


100% placebo. (Should be technically impossible as well, don't see how the CD can be compatible with RedBook audio standard)

Software which will use AAMQR?

Reply #4 –
If properly implemented, this should at least do no harm.
If if actually cause any difference on the output, then this should only happen on non redBook compliant devices (ie hiding broken parts).

So I think that it should be useless, but why not. This is not more useless than choosing the color of your hifi components.

Software which will use AAMQR?

Reply #5 –
Quote
100% placebo. (Should be technically impossible as well, don't see how the CD can be compatible with RedBook audio standard)
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=364938"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


The CD is perfectly compatible with the RedBook standard which allows linear velocities (and thus corresponding pit distances) between 1,2 m/s (74 and 80 Min. CD) and 1,4 m/s (AMQR, GigaRec 0,8 and older 63 Min. CD).
The name was Plex The Ripper, not Jack The Ripper
 

Software which will use AAMQR?

Reply #6 –
If the pits and lands are physically bigger it makes sense to me that the info would be more robust. Less likely to be effected by small scratches and problems with dyes aging. The closer the info is squeezed together ,the more that could be damaged by small scratches. I know that the Gigarec cdr s that only have 450Mb are burnt out to the edges. I can see how it would cause problems in some players ,but they seem to compensate ok. I can't hear any audible difference ,but it seems to me that as long as a player or drive is capable of playing the disks, there are some apparent advantages. If someone wanted to try it out they could burn two discs one at 70% and one normal. then make a paper template to apply scratches or even use a marker to make compromised areas in the same areas on both discs. Rip em and see what happens.