Do CD-R's sound the same as originals

Carl - I realize that your comments were not directed to me - I was just attempting to be funny. Mfgrep - I would encourage you to get the CDR burner and do the comparison tests for yourself. I'm curious if you doubt the ability to make "exact" copies from a pure physical standpoint - in trying to divide and conquer the problem, the first thing to do would be to determine if we're comparing apples to apples which, in my mind, is proving that the CD and CDR have "exactly" the same information. That's all I was trying to prove to myself with my tests - how they sound and if they sound different is another test. It shouldn't be surprising that this is quite possible even with a cheap CD transport - there is enough error correction / retry logic built in to insure proper reads, and the writes either work and you get a good copy or fail and notify you. In other words, it's cheap technology with a bunch of redundancy built in. Similarly, setting up a 100Mb LAN in your own home is a cheap proposition these days, again because it's cheap technology with a bunch of built in redundancy. I think the reason transports / interconnects in the audio world sound different is because they're not built with the same redundancy model - there, it is more "send and pray" that it gets there. If it doesn't, you miss it to the audible detriment of the listener. Now, if I can build a 100Mb "transport" for a digital datastream that covers my whole house for less than $1000 and deliver "bit perfect" data anywhere therein at data rates far exceeding redbook CDs (or even SACD's for that matter), then it would seem obvious to me that the future of digital interconnects is NOT what we currently have if it is so prone to error. In any case, I just wanted to clarify that I was only documenting a repeatable test for "perfect" data copies and not making any claim that the test covered the audibility of the copy vs. the original.

The reason different equipment sounds different is because there are differences in the reading and decoding (including prinbcipally turning into the analog domain) the information on a CD. As explained by others above, there is absolutely no degradation in the CD copying process (if properly done through a computer). Therefore the only explanation for sonic differences between CDs and exact-replica CD-Rs would have to come from differences in the player's ability to read one or the other, even if they both have the same information. Those who think CD-Rs sound worse would have to argue that there are more errors in processing the information from the CD-R, even if it is identical to that of the CD. I have not seen such argument made in a coherent manner above by any of the proponents of the "CD-R is worse" theory. Again, there are no errors in the duplication process, that is unquestionable. Those who ythink otherwise simply do not understand the nature of digital vs. analog sound.

I gotcha KThomas....I understand. But...to be clear...I could not care less if the charted copies "look" identical. I only care how it sounds. If CDR's introduce jitter...or if the laser has a difficult time reading the colored surface I do not know....but thus far....I'll keep buying from the cd store. BUT....you all have provided enterainment for me...and for that....thank you. I gotta go...Best Buy is calling my name.

Mfgrep - I can't stay away from the music section at Best Buy either - I find that I buy 7-8 CDs at a time because that's how many I can hold in one hand. In any case, just to plant a thought - if you prove to yourself that the digital copy is identical to the original and still sounds different to you on playback due to jitter, laser difficulties or whatever, you have to ask yourself why that is, since the same cheap plastic CD player in your computer can read that CDR and make as many more perfect copies as you care to make - ie, no generational loss. If it can do it (and it can), why can't CD players / transports? At some point inside a CD player / transport, you just have digital information, regardless of where it came from. If we can demonstrate that a cheap CD drive in a computer can reliably read that digital information and present it wherever it needs to go, then we, as consumers, should demand that makers of CD players / transports provide the same performance, and it shouldn't cost many thousands of dollars.

Ramstl, I could tell by the way you worded your question, that you "didn't really care anyway", so again, I find it strange that you were looking for a friendly exchange of aything from me....since you admit you could care less. It's possible that we agree on the CD-R issue, and I'm sure that by the time I'm your age, I'll have done many millions of recordings also. I'm considering buying some new mics, myself. I only use a "one-point" stereo condensor one right now, record on a portable DAT, and don't do many music performances, and certainly nothing "big time", yet. You did not hurt my feelings the least bit, so don't agonize over that.