I'm not dreaming - these are great CD copies

And yet the sound is better on the copy. 

And yet the sound is better on the copy.

Sez you and the OP, I have never ever found this, always the original has sounded less in your face and more musical.

Cheers George 

In your face and musical are just words. They certainly don’t mean the same thing to everyone. I like things to be in your face if that’s how they’re supposed to sound. I don’t like laid back sound if it’s supposed to be more present and dynamic. It all depends. Furthermore just because you find something to be true, which maybe you did, maybe you didn’t, it doesn’t necessarily follow that it’s univerally true.

When ripping on a PC, the disk can be read as many times as necessary to get a parity match. If the disc surface has been abused, this could result in a more accurate file.

I've heard disks burned on the mastering converter, CD test pressings and the commercial release. All sound different. People on the other side of the planet noticed identical differences on home as opposed to reference quality equipment.

IMO, label paint is unscientifically applied and contributes to errors.

Some CDP benefit from a Discus or other damping atop the disc. Shock absorbtion is always a good idea for the player.

Computer burned discs may or may not match the ripped file depending on the quality of the writer. Almost assuredly, the burned disc will have a shorter life.

Ripped and burned discs sound 'different'. Better is in the ear of the beholder.

“IMO, label paint is unscientifically applied and contributes to errors.”

The colors of the label paint can influence the sound. Definitely. The paint might even contain ferrous materials though I’ve certainly never checked. It’s just a hunch. Why else would demagnetizing a CD influence the sound? Now, that I have checked.