Talk:Compact Disc Digital Audio

message: I'm adding the  tag to this page. The meat of the article, describing the nature of the spec, needs some expansion I think. Perhaps a little about how the spec is used by manufacturers.
I'm a relatively technical person and I was completely bewildered by the middle passage.Jasongetsdown 22:31, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  too technical 

message: Can someone add to the article what the "Text" caption means in the Compact Disc Digital Audio logo?  (see right.)  Tempshill 01:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it is "CD-Text" as describe at http://www.true-audio.com/Compact_disc --Joshtek 14:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Text" logo 

message: The Red Book is the informal name for the Compact Disc Digital Audio specification (more commonly known as CD-Audio). While the word "standard" is quite similar, it doesn't quite mean the same thing. Products such as CDs are produced to meet a specification. When they are tested, they either meet the specification or they don't. Specifications are specific. Standards can be something less specific (de-facto, etc.). I would suggest that this article be renamed Red Book (CD-Audio specification).  Tvaughan1 13:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standard? 

message: Is it really $5000 to license the standard itself? I am guessing it's $5000 for a manufacturer of audio CDs to implement the standard. Anyone can get the publication for $200. —mjb 23:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Licensing confusion

message: Just a little note: According to our article on Kbps (data unit, following the disambiguation), a Kbps = 1000 Kbps. This is the standard typically used for digital audio and storage, so I think we should follow it. I recalculated and changed the nominal bitrate in the article from Kbps == 1024 bps to Kbps = 1000 bps. 4.242.108.211 (talk) 20:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I notice the article likes to often use different units: kbits here, KiBs there. Please unify. Jidanni (talk) 00:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The different units used are appropriate in context. tgies (talk) 09:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's back to basics. Uppercase "B" stands for "Byte" and lowercase "b" stands for "bit". 1 single Byte = 8 bits. In computers, one "Kilo" (2^10) stands for 1024 and not 1000. Then, 1 KB (Kilobyte) = 1024 Bytes. That said, 1KB = 8Kb. Allan Davidson (talk) 14:37, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kbps 

message: The article doesn't say something as simple as that.
"Maximum playing time is 74 minutes (including pauses)", however music CDs today can have 80 minutes, can't they? This leads to anyone who doesn't know too much about it to understand the Red Book is an old standard.--Jim88Argentina (talk) 03:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the Red Book standard still being used? 

message: Some early CDs seem to have preemphasis applied to improve SNR, sometimes (but often not) signified by some flag in the TOC. Early CD players often had a light to show if preemphasis was present and would apply appropriate filtering, but I'm not sure if modern players do and most ripping solutions (except iTunes apparently) have no provisions for dealing with this. Is this part of the Red Book standard, and could someone provide more useful information regarding this?
Found some discussions regarding this: , , ,  --Zilog Jones (talk) 16:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-emphasis 

message: There were a couple items of reader feedback (see the link near the top of this page) which I attempted to address in a series of edits today.
:I want to know which of the files on a commercial CD a normal CD player reads.
:[I was looking for the] difference between mp3 and cd format.
I believe I got both of these taken care of by adding a "files" section which explains that there are no files on a CD, that operating systems like Windows may offer virtual files as a sort of abstraction of the CD TOC, and that the common audio file formats are actually the product of ripping.
This basically amounts to a difficult-to-source "what Red Book is not" section, which I don't particularly like having... but it doesn't really seem to be the kind of thing that the average reader can easily figure out otherwise. —mjb (talk) 07:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's maybe a confusion from having seen VCD or DVD filestructures, I'd reckon. There are generally a certain minimum set of system / menu / structure files that are needed on those for the disc to successfully function as whatever type of video format it claims to be, and they're generally pretty cryptic and need special software to prepare. As audio CDs also require a specific burner, or section within burner software, it might be assumed that certain basic files e.g. containing the TOC, or an individual track each, are being written to the CD, wrong as that is. 51.7.16.171 (talk) 01:15, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Files section 

message: The technical details really weren't all that detailed, nor did they really explain the relationship between the physical pits-and-lands and the LPCM audio data, which is a crucial element of the Red Book standard. I attempted to address this by adding a data encoding section, summarizing info from Ken Pohlmann's The Compact Disc Handbook, since I don't have access to the actual standard.
I also sought to clarify that the term sector comes from the CD-ROM/DAE/SCSI world and is not part of the Red Book standard, as far as I know.
This led me to the article's info about CD data rates, which I attempted to consolidate into its own section. I thought it would be interesting to add the raw data rates of CDDA, which get into the Mbps range. Again, this info comes from Pohlmann's book.
I would appreciate review of these additions, and please discuss or make corrections as needed. Thanks! —mjb (talk) 07:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your additions. I'm not aware of factual issues with your additions, but I think some of the section's content would better be in Compact discs. As I understand it, the CD started with CDDA, so the physical details of CDs were once specific to CDDA. However, since this is no longer the case, I believe we should factorize the common parts of all CD variants (CDDA, CD-ROM, etc.) to Compact discs. For example, the 3 pictures on the left would be pertinent there. Even if they apply here, I believe we should avoid duplication and just move there. --Chealer (talk) 00:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I just moved two of those pictures to the CD article. I also tried expanding the data encoding sectiona bit, since it contained several abbreviations with no links and it was difficult to follow at first. I will also probably try to restructure sections a bit, since there seems to be duplication between the Data encoding and the Data structure sections, and the order of the sections currently does not follow any clear logic. Sega381 (talk) 14:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

text: I tried to address some of the shortcomings by merging duplicated information, and by restructuring some sections. However, there is still some duplicated information and I am still not convinced of the logic for the ordering of the sections. We may still want to move some common information to the CD article. Sega381 (talk) 14:47, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Data encoding section

message: DVD Audio is not a format deviation but a rival successor format. If this is included so should SACD, which in its hybrid form is at least compatible with CDs. Also, if such details are included in this article I suggest a new heading of Successor Formats... but where do you end? MP3/Ogg/Blu Ray Audio/etc? I suggest removing DVD audio completely. But should we include hybrid SACD since it is compatible? Derekjc (talk) 17:21, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Format deviations

message: It would be nice if somebody could add a section on this, or remove the redirect link.  It's not cool to have a redirect for SHM-CD to this page, and then have this page utterly silent about it.
-TMusgrove.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tmusgrove (talk • contribs) 20:57, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you elucidate? It's not something I've ever heard of before, so I'm at a loss for being able to add any such information, or even gauge how many people might actually follow such a link. 51.7.16.171 (talk) 12:28, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: SHM-CD

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Compact Disc Digital Audio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.audaud.com/article.php?ArticleID=410
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090822172353/http://www.dvddemystified.com:80/dvdfaq.html to http://www.dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141104160226/http://www.exp-math.uni-essen.de/~immink/pdf/cdstory.htm to http://www.exp-math.uni-essen.de/~immink/pdf/cdstory.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141104160224/http://www.exp-math.uni-essen.de/%7Eimmink/pdf/beethoven.htm to http://www.exp-math.uni-essen.de/~immink/pdf/beethoven.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Compact Disc Digital Audio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120501075730/http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/bchafy/cdb/info/info.html to http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/bchafy/cdb/info/info.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.exp-math.uni-essen.de/~immink/pdf/beethoven.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:31, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: wants to change instances of linear PCM to PCM. Their justification is, The page "Linear pulse code modulation" does not exist, it redirects to "Pulse code modulation". This is true but it is not a great justification. Linear PCM is identified in bold as a topic and clearly explained in the second paragraph of the PCM lead. The CD uses linear PCM which today is may not be readily confused with other PCM variants but back when the CD was developed other PCM variants such as mu law and a law were more prevalent relative to linear PCM and linear PCM was considered lavish. ~Kvng (talk) 13:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linear PCM vs. PCM 

message: Are there any cd with 48000hz instead of 44100Hz 16 bit pcm AMPLECONCH (talk) 09:15, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No, these would not be playable in a standard CD player. You can get further with CDROM with 48 kHz WAV or MP3 files. ~Kvng (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any cd with 48000Hz