Why does the copy sound better than the original

Jim (Jea48), I've done my comparison. Consistent with your suggestions as to what kinds of material should be used I've duplicated the following CD's, and compared the particular selections on them that are indicated below:

1)Chopin's Piano Sonata No. 3, Hyperion Knight, Pianist; on "Music of Chopin," Wilson Audio WCD-9129.

This is the best sounding CD of solo piano music I have ever heard.

2)"O Mio Babbino Caro," from the opera "Gianni Schicchi," Dame Kiri Te Kanawa, Lyric Soprano; on "Puccini's Greatest Hits," RCA MLK 45809.

3)"All The Things You Are," Joan Morris, Mezzo Soprano with William Bolcom, Piano; on "Silver Linings: Songs by Jerome Kern," Arabesque Z6515.

From a musical standpoint, this is IMO the best rendition I have ever heard of this widely recorded old standard. Sonics are excellent, as well.

4)Songs by Rebecca Pidgeon, Sara K., and Ana Caram on "The Ultimate Demonstration Disc," Chesky UD95.

The CD's were duplicated on a home-built Windows-based desktop computer using Asus DRW-2014L1T internal DVD/CD drives, and Nero Burning ROM 7 software. The drives are about 3 years old, and have been used moderately. A verification cycle was performed by the software after burning, and its "ignore read errors" option was deselected. I used Taiyo Yuden CD-R's rated for 52x speed. The drives are rated for 48x speed. Burning was done at 8x speed, which was the slowest available option.

I performed the comparison using both my Daedalus Ulysses speakers, with VAC amplification, and my Stax electrostatic headphones. The CDP is a Bryston BCD-1, and the preamp a Classe CP-60. A lot of the circuitry in the preamp is not in the signal path during headphone listening, because the Stax headphone amp connects to its tape outputs.

I went back and forth between the original and the copy multiple times, to confirm my perceptions. Here's what I heard:

The differences were extremely small, and were perceivable just on certain notes, from time to time. In all cases, however, the original was clearly better than the copy, notwithstanding the subjective nature of "better" Mr. T referred to earlier.

The copies at times added a slight harshness to sibilants. There was also a slight loss of definition in the treble region on piano notes, resulting in a slightly more "tinkly" character. On the Joan Morris recording, her voice sounded very slightly more nasal on the copy.

I did not sense any thinness or loss of body at any time, which you described hearing on copies produced with your equipment.

The bottom line, as I see it: Differences can be expected, and as I said earlier:

I would expect the magnitude and character of the differences to be highly dependent on the design of the particular player that is being used (and probably also on the particular media, burner, and burn speed that are used).

And per the quotes and links I provided earlier, the existence of those differences is technically plausible, and explainable based on concepts that are well recognized in electronic design.

Best regards,
-- Al

Thanks Almarg for the reasoned approach. Also thanks for doing those comparisons. Rpg sorry about my way out there response. But every once and awhile I want to be the alien police when certain ones here make some of their comments. So the reason for mine. Anyway through Almarg and some others you will find they provide reason and logic to our discussions which are priceless in a wacky world.

Al wrote,

"The differences were extremely small, and were perceivable just on certain notes, from time to time. In all cases, however, the original was clearly better than the copy, notwithstanding the subjective nature of "better" Mr. T referred to earlier."

I suppose one might ask, how can you say the differences were "extremely small," just barely perceptible on certain notes, yet in the same breath say the original was "clearly better than the copy." The results do not appear to support such a conclusion at all.

Al also wrote,

"And per the quotes and links I provided earlier, the existence of those differences is technically plausible, and explainable based on concepts that are well recognized in electronic design."

I'm not sure I would say Science has come to the rescue, as you apparently wish to do, based on the results you described. I suspect inconclusive results might be a more appropriate conclusion.

12-09-12: Geoffkait
I suppose one might ask, how can you say the differences were "extremely small," just barely perceptible on certain notes, yet in the same breath say the original was "clearly better than the copy." The results do not appear to support such a conclusion at all.

There is no inconsistency there, Geoff. What I was trying to say would have come across more clearly if after the words "clearly better than the copy" I had added the words "upon very careful comparison." And I'll add now that while the differences were small, and a lot of the time there was no difference, ALL of the perceivable differences were in the direction of being better on the original.

Marqmike, thanks very much for the kind compliment.

Regards,
-- Al

Al,

Thanks for taking the time to do the CD copy to original CD listening test experiment.
Jim