CDR Fidelity?


A recent thread about CD's that people use to evaluate changes in their system was interesting because some people are burning their own compilation of songs on CDR to test out new equipment. This would avoid bringing a stack of CD's to the dealers or wherever but...

My question is this: Is the quality of CDR's equal to that of your standard redbook disc? Shouldn't there be some loss of fidelity when copying CD's? I have always thought that my CDRs sounded worse than the store bought original. CDR's always seemed to be more compressed without as good dynamics and detail. This is of course even worse when the CDR is a converted MP3 disc.

What have you A'goners found?

I use a PC running Win XP, sound card is Creative Labs Sound Blaster Audigy. I use Clone CD to copy discs and Windows Media Player for MP3 ripping. CD burner is a standard Sony 8/4/32 CDRW.
128x128karl_desch
I have found the same thing as well. There are apparently a variety of methods to handle copying of discs and, with experimentation, one could probably discover a way to maximize the fidelity of CD-R recordings. Whatever audiophile tendencies I may be prone to, I did believe that a direct digital copy of a disc should be very close, if not nearly identical. Well, I was very surprised at how notable the difference was. Without shifting into metaphorical lingo, I'll simply say that they sound very "wrong" (if you know what I mean). This was actually a little depressing, as my initial excitement at using a CD burner to make snazzy compilations, etc. was immediately deflated. I am simply using a run-of-the-mill motherboard with Roxio software and a TEAC disc drive. Just to confirm what was readily apparent to me, I did do some A/B testing for a buddy of mine who I had made approximately six or seven of these CD copies for. I switched between copy and original for approximately 10 tracks, with one or two tracks from each disc. They discerned the copy from the original with 100% accuracy, and did so almost immediately (within 10 seconds of listening). This is not an audiophile sort of guy and they were pretty surprised at the significant difference in quality. This is not to say that they are unlistenable or even 'bad' sounding, but given what I now know, it's hard to get too fired up about using the computerized CD copying resource. I would actually be curious to hear some knowledgable technical discussion outlining what happens between point A and B that will create these differences and how they can be minimized (ie. what's the 'best' way to make CD copies on the computer). I did recently make a test copy at a local dealer's shop of a CD with a Marantz stereo component CD player/recorder and this fared MUCH better. Enough so, that I'm considering purchasing one.
Theoretically, digital signal should not have changed with copy process, but it has never been the case. I have noticed a significant loss of image and depth with my CD-R copies comparing to the originals, no matter how I vaired my copy process (burning speed, copier, blank media).

Different brands of CD-R produce different kind of sound. For example, I have found in general the gold CD-Rs have clear and crisp details in treble while the bass is thinned out. Sound from silver dye CD-Rs seems to be closer to the original played on my system.

I have compared 10+ brands and coating of CD-Rs and cannot pick an obvious winner. So far Kodak silver takes the lead.

Anyone has other findings?
My copies sound basically as good as the original, in some ways they are better, and in some ways the original is better. I consider it a toss up. I am not using a computer to burn the CDs however. I am using a professional model Tascam CD burner and a high quality digital cable as well as a very good transport as the source. The burning is done in real time (not high speed) It seems like everyone who doesn't like the quality of CDRs is burning them using Computer software and a CDR drive.