Jump to content

Talk:Extended Resolution Compact Disc

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Widefox (talk | contribs) at 15:35, 23 December 2018 (Assessment: +Technology: class=Start; +Electronics: class=Start, importance=Low; +Professional sound production: class=Start, importance=Low; +Computing: class=Start, importance=Low, hardware=y, hardware-importance=Low (assisted)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconTechnology Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconElectronics Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk pageElectronicsWikipedia:WikiProject ElectronicsTemplate:WikiProject Electronicselectronic
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconProfessional sound production Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Professional sound production, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sound recording and reproduction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Professional sound productionWikipedia:WikiProject Professional sound productionTemplate:WikiProject Professional sound productionProfessional sound production
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconComputing Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Em, anon user 194.89.XXX claims to remove garbage but instead add plenty of garbage of his/her own. Owing to the difficulty in understanding some of his/her phrasing ("the purest form of SACD") as well as the obvious factual disparities ("analogue"; "unlike HDCD, XRCD refers purely to the optimal quantization of the source materials" - which is precisely what HDCD does), I have restored much of the article. My advice is if you want to change something, please check out the accuracy via some form of online research. Pls don't introduce vulgarities in the edit summary, especially when one's contributions are considerably worse off than previous editors'. Mandel 08:04, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


My first edits were somewhat hasty, which I admit, but now I think that the article is extremely well-off. Before my edits, it not only had what I perceive as layman's *opinions* but also a multitude of factual errors. If something is run through a digital-to-analogue converter, the resulting material definitely isn't going to be digital. This claim was what lead me to believe that there is only a slightly poor phrasing there, so I thought I'd correct it quickly. After a while, however, I noticed that there was a LOT to be corrected with the article. Regarding your "precisely what HDCD does" bit, that's not true at all - there is a lot of matters at work with HDCDs. The stream has extra control information studded in the least significant bits and a HDCD decoder will react to it, providing improved dynamics or whatever the mastering engineer has deemed a passage to need. An XRCD on the other hand DOES NOT have any special control information or the like. It will be EXACTLY a regular CD, albeit done as well as possible. Of course, a HDCD will also be according to redbook standard, but its least significant bits will be used for the control data instead of audio quality. I'm trying to understand why you keep reverting when I'm clearly trying to improve the article. Let's work this through. 194.89.2.126 11:12, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Still, XRCDs are optimally the very best the Compact Disc can offer" ... Isn't this a bit of a tautology? Optimally, any CD is the best CD can be. That's what optimal means. --68.41.122.213 11:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:XRCD.jpg

Image:XRCD.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not format

XRCD is not an technical format; it is a recording process. i think that this articel must be removed or moved to another section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.163.43.108 (talk) 11:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree 100% and came here to say the same. This shouldn't be listed as a format. 2.25.126.224 (talk) 20:49, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Audiophile talk

Somebody please note that this article is written from an audiophile's point of view. Somebody should say that this JVC process itself is much more expensive than necessary. The fact that you paid $10,000,000,000 for audio hardware by itself does not mean that the output is better than from a $1000 worth equipment.

The medium where the digitized data is stored (magneto-optical) has no influence to sound quality. Any flash thumb drive could be used. The extremely precise production of the final medium (compact disc) is overkill if a regular compact disc can yeald perfect copy. If this were not the case, no computer programs could be run from CDs. There is no reason why a DAC should synchronize its clock to the data medium. Just get a low jitter clock and play any source at "Rubidium quality".

I am not very knowledgeable about audio jitter, but something tells me that once the ADC has produced jittery result no digital processing can reduce it. What do experts have to say about this matter? -- J7N —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.99.184.75 (talk) 13:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Snake oil

Most of "information" in this article is pure marketing bullshit which doesn't make any sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.235.91.45 (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Extended Resolution Compact Disc. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:36, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Extended_Resolution_Compact_Disc&oldid=875070251"