Here's how a CD copy of a copy can sound better


Just wanting to check my logic here. People keep saying how burning CD copies at 1x speed allow them to sound better (than 32x speed, say) when being played back through Audiophile systems. I have burned copies of several CD's at 8x, and do not have the original. I should be able to take these copies and make re-copies at 1x speed, and these 1x copy-of-a-copy copies should sound better than their counterparts, right?

There is no data lost when a CD is copied, only placed on the disc differently. This is evidenced by the fact that you can copy a CD-ROM, which is a bit-perfect copy.
matt8268
Matt...try it and then go have a liten with volume levels as closely matched as possible....then tell us what you think?
Ake, I was surprised by this as well. I have a CD copy done by a Thomas W. Shea, E-mail; http://www.sunset.net/musicman that is absolute proof that a copy can be better than the original. I'm not sure if it's due to sucessive upsampling,oversampling and/or error correction but there is no doubt that it's better than the original. This copy was done before my eyes at a Sterophile show in NY many years ago in conjunction with the folks from Audio Alchemy. I also have copies of CD's given to me by friends done on their PC's and they are not as good as the over the counter examples. Whether it's due to added jitter or to some kind of electronic distortions added by the inner working of the computer I don't know, but I do know that it's audible.
"If done correctly digital copies can sound better than the original. If done incorrectly digiatl copies can sound worse than the original."

They can sound better if you get all the members of the band together and have them re-record the music. when you are coppying it can only get worse or stay the same.
The original copy is digital, the second copy will be analog, not digital due to copy protection. Unless you get a "pro" version which ignores SCMS copyright protection.