A question for you really really smart guys....

[GZsound]

Can someone explain to me why I can go to my local electronics store and buy a stand alone DVD recorder for $129, but a stand alone CD recorder costs at least $300?

 

Why can I buy a Plextor internal CD burner for my computer for $39 at Frys, but a stand alone CD recorder costs at least $300?

 

Oh yeah, and why can I buy a mini disk recorder for $149 while a stand alone CD recorder COSTS OVER $300!!

 

Am I missing something?

 

I want a reasonable priced (cheap) stand alone CD recorder.. WTF?

[Philip OKeefe]

Uh, ecconomics of scale?

 

I'm sure a lot more internal CD and DVD drives, as well as stand-alone DVD's are produced each year compared to stand-alone CD recorders, which never really caught on.

 

But I agree - they shouldn't cost over three bills... I'd estimate the price differential, considering that the internal mechanisms are so similar to what you have in internal drives, shouldn't amount to more than say, a doubling in price. Of course, you do have the extra cost involved with the case, but DVD recorders have those too, right? Yeah, about $200 sounds about right to me, when you consider all of that as well as the supply and demand thing. But I'm making a WAG about all of this.

 

Oh, and did they ever put a "tax" on consumer type CD recorders? Not sure about that... but it was under discussion at one point IIRC, along with the stinger they put on "audio CD-R's".

 

My advice? Go internal if you can.

[Mats Olsson.]

You could buy an empty cabinet and a internal burner for a lot less than 300

[Prague]

Originally posted by GZ Sound.:

Why can I buy a Plextor internal CD burner for my computer for $39 at Frys, but a stand alone CD recorder costs at least $300?

"I'll take the top of the line computer, but hold the monitor, hold the hard drive, hold the power supply, hold the keyboard, and bring me the $39 CD burner!!"

 

http://www.movieactors.com/freezeframes22/fiveeasy61.jpeg

[techristian]

It is like Phil said. Mass production. Possibly 1 million DVD burners compared to 10,000 STAND ALONE CD burners.

 

Think about this for a moment though. I can burn CDs with my computer DVD burner, so is there a stand alone DVD burner that will burn CDs ??? So my first question back to you is have you checked to find out if any stand alone DVD recorders record CDs? Most stand alone DVD players will play CD's. I'm sure that there are DVD recorders inside those "stand alone" boxes with the CD recording capability but the buttons on the front panel ,for the end user, may not be able to access fully the features of the internal DVD recorder.

 

This sounds like a good hack project???

 

Dan

 

http://musicinit.com/pvideos.html

[Dak Lander]

Am I wrong, not being one of the really smart guys, or are not the stand alone cd burners all auto feed or multiple disk burners? That would certainly explain the price differential.

I don't recall seeing a single, one at a time stand alone cd burner.

[techristian]

I don't recall seeing a single, one at a time stand alone cd burner.

I think that Phillips advertised one on TV a few years ago.

 

Dan

 

http://teachmedrums.com

[Blue Strat]

When I was working at Circuit City a few years ago, we carried stand alone CD burners by Phillips. These were the home stereo type burners. I think they were about $350 at the time I quit.

[theblue1]

I think there's so little market for stand alone CD burners because today's computers can whip up audio CD's as a quick, trivial process.

 

But recording TV shows and burning DVD's can tie up a computer for a fairly long time.

 

Ergo, lots of folks see the need for a standalone DVD, meaning a big market, an economy of scale, resulting in low production and distribution costs and low prices to consumers.

 

PS... why do you want a standalone CD writer, anyhow? You have to try to find more expensive ("licensed") audio CDs. You have less options. And, in the old days, the burns from some of them were sometimes problematic (no disk-at-once, etc).

[GZsound]

Thanks for the answers..but they are all wrong!!

 

First off, it's not economies of scale. The CD was extremely popular and millions upon millions were sold before DVD was even available to the consumer. But there never were any reasonably priced home CD burners.

 

Second, the question cannot be technology because if an internal Plextor CD-r drive costs under fifty bucks, why would a single stand alone burner cost six times that amount?

 

Next, there might be a big market to record movies to DVD NOW, but two and three years ago, there was not that same market, and yet there has been a market for burning CD's for many years..and using a computer it was possible for cheap.

 

Stand alone recorders: Marantz CDR300 - $700.00, Superscope PD300 - $1,050.00, Tascam CDR 750 - $550.00.

 

And a really good question is why are DVD stand alone recorders that now sell for close to a hundred bucks NOT backward compatible and record CD's too? They play CD's, MP3, etc., but don't record CD's.

 

I honestly am baffled and so far not one explanation makes any sense, especially if you go back to two years ago before DVD became so popular.

 

Mass production? Any idea how many COMPUTER CD burners have been manufactured? I just paid $24 for one for my office computer..why am I supposed to pay over $300 just because it stands by itself?

[Philip OKeefe]

Thanks for the answers..but they are all wrong!!

 

First off, it's not economies of scale. The CD was extremely popular and millions upon millions were sold before DVD was even available to the consumer. But there never were any reasonably priced home CD burners.

 

Sorry GZ, but you just contradicted yourself a bit there. Yes, there were tons of commercially produced CD's sold, and tons of internal burners... FAR FAR more than the numbers of stand-alone CD recorders that have been sold. It probably IS ecconomics of scale at work... it doesn't matter that some of the parts used in stand-alone and internal burners are similar... you still have development, advertising and other costs that come with each seperate product... and if you can make a million units and sell them, you can usually do so for far less, on a cost per unit basis, than if you can only manage to sell, say, 10,000 units. Parts ordered in massive quantities tend to run a lot less than those purchased in limited quantities...

 

As I said, one reason the prices on stand-alone CD burners never dropped is that there was never much of a demand for them, and there were not many of them made - relatively speaking. And many of them were buggy and frankly, a PITA to use. Heck, I'm an engineer and I had problems trying to get my brother in law's stand-alone Phillips unit to operate properly. Heaven help the average home user who is trying to get one to work. Maybe current units are better, but the earlier ones I've tried were a major pain.

 

Also, don't make the mistake of assuming that an internal burner and an external one are identical. You have all sorts of user interface and software issues you have to address with a stand-alone that are handled by a host computer with a internal burner. You also have the converters you need for a stand-alone, that you do not have on a internal burner... both A/D and D/A. Ever wonder why a Alesis Masterlink is far more expensive than a stand alone DVD recorder or internal CD burner? When they were new, they were listing for a grand IIRC, and essentially they're just a external HDR and high bit rate CD burner...

 

Also, as I mentioned, I believe there is a tax or surcharge on stand-alone burners... just as there is on "Audio CD-R's" for use in them. That too could account for some of the price differential.

 

Also, I think it's safe to assume that the new CD burner you just purchased isn't the latest / fastest / greatest... not at that price, and not when ultra-fast, multi-media (DVD / CD), multi-layer burners are the current top of the line products... so comparing something that cost you $30 because it's older technology that's been massively produced and is being "blown out" to make room for the newer models is hardly a fair comparison.

 

I may indeed be wrong about all of the reasons for the cost differences, and I may be overlooking some things, but I can pretty safely guarantee you that ecconomics of scale are indeed a contributing factor.

[theblue1]

"...especially if you go back to two years ago before DVD became so popular."

 

Two years ago?

 

 

Anyhow, standalone CD-recorders never made much sense to me.

[Mats Olsson.]

Sorry, I thought you asked about why external CD-burners for computers are expensive...

[not Cereal]

i have a glyph external 4x scsi burner that cost over $600 in 1997.

 

it still works perfectly, albeit slowly. and its mac bootable.

 

although i tend to burn cd's on the g4 as it will burn at 32x.

 

i dont know why anyone would want to use a standalone burner, dvd or cd. i routinely make video-dvd's on my g4/pc and cant see how not having the control over conversion would yeild decent results. and ive SEEN what those dvd burners do, its a crime.

 

same with cd's.

[GZsound]

Well, thanks all. I actually think Phil hit on the real reason. I believe stand alone CD burners ended up in the same category as home DAT recorders. The attempted restrictions on illegal copying of CD's.

 

Until the advent of computer CD burners the government and the industry didn't want Joe six pack to burn CD's in the comfort of his home. Just like DAT tapes.

 

Once computer CD burners became necessary for data storage, the fact they could also burn music CD's opened the flood gates.

 

I am surprised at those who cannot imagine a use for a stand alone CD recorder. I know a band that burns to CD every gig using their rack mount Sony. A friend of mine does national radio spots for charities and he records all his "man on the street" interviews to portable CD (Marantz).

 

Not everyone wants to lug around a laptop just to burn CD's. Although I can buy a nice laptop with CD and DVD burner for less than the price of some stand alone CD recorders...go figger.

 

And there was no demand for in home CD burners?

 

Probably because they were priced so high, which was the plot from the beginning, to discourage illegal copying of music CD's. Just like DAT.

[Bill Roberts]

Internal computer burner:

 

Drive, pickup I/O buss.

 

Stand alone:

 

Power supply, amplification stages, A/D D/A, metering, controls, remote, fancy front, weight, amount of components, consumerism markup, marketing, ...well you get more goods..you pays more money.

 

The both ultimatly do the same thing...one does it all..the other needs support hardware to do anything.

[Hanshananigan]

To each his own, but I don't see how either of those applications couldn't be done by other means. For example, teh Marantz unit seems pretty cumbersome for a "man on the street" interview, and although smaller than a laptop, would still require a case, etc. Unless perhaps he's using multiple mics and needs phantom power, I'd think those digital or tape doohickies reporters use would work fine.

 

For recording live, I'd be interested in how folks here do it. If you just want a basic record of the show, is something like the Marantz really doing a better job (can I assume they are running off the boards, or do they have a separate mixer set up for the CD-R?) than simply recording into a laptop (2 tracks)? For that matter, you can get digital mulitrack recorders, sometimes with CDs for less than the Marantz (Fostex VF160EX 16-Track Recorder with CD Burner at musiciansfriend.com, $799), and you'll be able to mix after the show to boot.

 

What do you want to do with a CD recorder, Mark?

[GZsound]

I appreciate there are other ways to do what a stand alone CD recorder would do. That wasn't my point. My point is why are computer CD recorders twenty bucks, DVD recorders are a little over a hundred and NOT backward compatible with CD-R, and why in the hell a stand alone CD burner costs so much....

 

A good point is that I can buy a Fostex VF160D 16 track recorder with built in CD burner and 40 gig hard drive for LESS than a stand alone Sony or Superscope CD recorder.

 

I thought it would be nice to just come off a two track tape out and record our sets direct to CD. A simple rack mounted or rack shelf mounted CD recorder with basic I/O used to record the band sets and play music on the breaks.

 

That's what a couple friends do and it works quite well. An instant CD of your gig.

 

Or I could buy a laptop, record the gig from the same tape outs of the board, edit the recording into set segments, save it, and burn a CD later.

 

More expense, more things to break, more hassle, no way to rack mount the laptop and the only good news is it's cheaper to buy a laptop for that purpose than a stupid stand alone CD recorder.

 

My main point. I firmly believe it's a plot.

[Hanshananigan]

Gottcha, Mark. Of course, your other option is to only play arenas that have that record-burn-sell in parking lot after gig technology. That's what our band does- 'course, we haven't played out in several years...

[fantasticsound]

You are all missing the most important point. (Although Phil, Bill Roberts, and others have made valid points.)

 

Copy protection.

 

In addition to the hardware issues Bill mentioned, copy protection explains some of the price and all of GZ's backwards compatibility issues.

 

DVD's, from the beginning, were created with copy protection. CD's, as we are all well aware, were not. Hence, stand alone CD recorders are built with SCMS and require certain, "music" CD's to record on and will only record at high speed from sources the recorder deems are unprotected.

 

Believe me, I know. I tried to convince my boss to by a stand alone, multi-burner unit for around $500. One master to three copies. He opted for a stand alone, home burner because he liked the ease of use (though he will never be the one using it) as well as the potential use of analog inputs. (At this point, I've recorded an interview off NPR for my own listening pleasure. Not one use of analog inputs for the business.)

 

It's a Sony, five disc player to a single burner. As previously mentioned, I must use music CD's, which cost more, in part, to pay the royalty that's shared by the record companies to compensate for illegal copying. This is not done for DVD's. You simply can't copy a DVD on a consumer, stand alone burner. If it's possible, it requires physical replacement of a computer chip inside.

 

The record companies lost the war against internal, computer burners so there is nothing they can do, either to force use of SCMS encoded, music CD's nor recoup any monies through the royalty associated with them.

 

What GZ fails to understand is the timing with which people have become accustomed to burning CD's and DVD's.

 

CD burning in the computer has been ubiquotous for 5 years or more. There was no authoring involved to create mix discs on your computer. Any idiot could do it.

 

But DVD burning on the computer has only come into it's own in the past year or two. At the same time, DVD burners became commonplace and inexpensive because of the shared technology with already inexpensive CD burners, no need for additional copy protection wrangling in the business world and the courts, and the writing was definitely on the wall regarding DVR's.

 

The makers of DVD technology knew (and know) their days are numbered. DVD's will likely be popular as a release medium for movies and television shows but will largely disappear from the tv-recording market as DVR's, which offer the flexibility of a computer recorder and the ease of use consumers expect from a stand alone unit, take over. The one area where DVR's fail to stand up to DVD's is in portability. But it is my belief that most people who want to record their own material will turn to their computer to burn DVD's.

 

In the mean time, I'm loving my DVD recorder (a gift from my father-inlaw) for recording tv shows for later viewing. I think I'd prefer a DVR, but beggars can't be choosers. (We don't even have basic cable. )