CD Tweeks...Improve Ripped SQ?

Alfe wrote,

"see this link for information about pit structure and also notice the size of a laser spot, so reflectivity is not an issue no need to enhance it with any placebo product."

The (primary) problem is the scattering of the laser light while the data is being read. The laser light is scattered by the pits themselves as well as the clear polycarbonate layer. Both the visible red component of the scattered light as well as the invisible component of the light can be detected by the photodetector as real signal. Therein lies the problem: the detector is a "stupid" device and cannot distinguish between pure reflected light from the physical Lands and the background scattered light. This is why coloring CDs to absorb the visible red AND absorbing invisible scattered light are so profound. Having said that, I can certainly understand how someone can convince himself that he is hearing everything. After all, CDs have always been marketed as Perfect Sound Forever. I'm afraid we are in the process of learning just how imperfect they actually are.

there is no pit and lands in a CD-R!!!
a CD-R is a blank data spiral with a photosensitive dye.
the write laser changes the color of the dye (dark and clear) and that sit.
and because the dye is photosensitive every time you read the disc you are adding errors.

Geofkait

The name for what you are describing"as scattering of laser light" is diffracted order and they are considered on the SalomonReed correction.

Alfe. Wrote,

"there is no pit and lands in a CD-R!!!
a CD-R is a blank data spiral with a photosensitive dye.
the write laser changes the color of the dye (dark and clear) and that sit.
and because the dye is photosensitive every time you read the disc you are adding errors."

But we're not talking about CD-Rs, we're talking about CDs. Ripping CDs, to be accurate. Refer to the original post.

Mapman, the evidence is there, you just dismiss it. You know, the evidence of others' experience with coloring CDs, demagnetizing CDs, ionizing CDs, CD enhancer fluids and so forth. Those who are actually trying these things. All these demands for PROOF, you know, as opposed to EVIDENCE, are a little illogical and if you don't mind my saying so the last resort of a stubborn naysayer who just found out he's run out of ammo. By "ammo" I'm referring to an actual argument, you know, a scientific argument. And evidence to support your argument would be nice.