Do CD-R's sound the same as originals

Well, it's obvious that this is like just about every other subjective opinion re audio and I don't dispute anyone's belief in what they think they hear. For myself, I have learned after decades of critical listening, numberless discussions such as these, and several controlled blind tests involving disparate equipment and individuals, that we can sometimes fool ourselves into believing something that isn't so. Especially since it almost invariably involves aural memory. I have done three blind tests with DCC, mini-disc, and CDR. The digital-lossy formats are fairly obviously different in most cases, but can sound good occasionally. The CDR test were run as with every other such test I am involved with. I.e., at times during the test sequences, a sample is compared (blindly) with itself. If done fairly, this can be quite revealing. In the case of CDRs, more often than not, when the original was compared to itself, it was called different (by myself and others).The usual listening group has been 4 to 6 persons. I am, of course, aware that many heard distinctions are valid and can usually be supported by evidence. I don't question that a given individual (such as yourself) actually hears what is there. But, I also know from experience that for some, at some times, it isn't. The original question was whether or not CDRs sound the same as their original. My assertion was that if it is truly an accurate copy, it's likely that it does. Of course, I acknowledge that some recording/playback combinations may yield different results. Obviously, there is a divergence of opinion reflected in these many postings. What we might be able to agree on is that sometimes they do and sometimes they don't depending upon when, who and what is involved. I also still record with analog cassette and reel-to-reel. You'll notice that in these various threads, I don't demean individuals or equipment out of hand. My interest is solely in providing an honest opinion based upon experience. I stopped entering pissing contests at about age 22.

Mfgrep: If that's occuring. You're definately experiencing substandard performance. Do I dare ask from whom you've purchased that equipment?

what equipment?...you mean my computer burner?? Best buy...it is a simple HP $150 jobbie. I have spoken with several people who say that this is a somewhat common occurrence. Anyone else out there???

and to whom are you addressing your first post above Waldhorner??(3 posts prior to this one)

Have been following this thread with great interest although I can't add anything more than has been previously stated. If you can DEFINITELY hear a difference other than anomalities from the transfer, I can't. Have any of the proponents that note these differences done any blind tests to absolutely confirm their findings? I would be interested in knowing and also the details of how the tests were conducted. I do not doubt that differences were heard if stated but I just did some blind tests again this weekend and again could not differentiate between original and copy during the music, only when going between tracks. I believe one can hear what they want to hear if prejudiced by knowing what they are listening to before hand. That isn't to say there are differences. I am curious about it for the fact that there is such division on this issue, why? Does this have to do with better hearing for the proponents that can hear the difference or do they know what they are listening to first and then make their determination accordingly? Or finally are their copies really so different to the point that the differences could be heard by anyone?