Do "gold" discs sound better?

I agree with the above comments, but have yet to find a gold and aluminum version of the exact same CD, meaning same mastering and everything to compare. Pretty much all the gold CD's have very high quality mastering and manufacturing, which accounts for them being superior--likely far more than the gold itself. I personally believe the gold was about 90% marketing and probably less than 10% sonic or longevity contribution.

Supposedly, gold is more reflective.
But both Celitc66 and Garfish are right, what really matters is the mastering and the quality control of the manufacturing.

KP

Agree with the above. Gold looks fancy, but is essentially
irrelevant to the sound. The two consistently best labels
in my experience for sound quality are JVC/XRCD and
Mapleshade, both of which use exclusively aluminum discs.

Hmm... I always thought the gold was merely a marketing ploy, and that what you were really buying was a better recording. I've replaced certain "standard" CDs in my collection with Gold CDs (e.g., Dylan's Blonde on Blonde, REM's Murmur and Reckoning, esp. Miles' Kind of Blue) and found, in all cases, that the gold version sounded better--not as much compression, better dynamics, less noise.

I agree with the above opinions about gold CDs being more hype. I think that the engineering, mastering and attention to manufacturing details have much more to do wit the sound.

A couple of quibbles:
Craig, isn't "The Healer" a John Lee Hooker album (or is JLH's album "Faith Healer"?).

Jvogt: Mapleshade has at least one non-aluminum CD. I have a copy of Sweetman, "Austin Backalley Blues" that is a gold/copper alloy. Says so on the label, and it's not silver.