What are you all doing to modify your cds?

Ghost rider, under my user name, look up "Wash, Cut, Polish & Demagnetize". It was a pretty lengthy thread with many responses. It should give you a pretty good overall view of what everyone out there is doing.

Warren, It's summer time. You know me, in the summer it's the house, house, house. And of course, summer also means cruisin in the muscle car, muscle car, muscle car. I often wonder what actually sound better, my music or 390 cubic inches purring on Cam 2.:)

Brian, nothing even comes close to a good running Chevy big block. It's too bad Chevy didn't build an AMX.

Hi Sean, long time since we went around on this subject.

Ready, point/counterpoint

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue1/swartz.htm

Happy Listening!

Hi again Sean, if you really think about it, what fun would it be if we were not off our rockers. In terms of these CD tweaks, I have no explanation whatsoever why they work. In theory, they really should make no difference. But they do. And, I'll put my ears up against any piece of test equipment any day of the week, for the simple reason, that is ultimately the criteria I use.

I also would have to question whether you can actually hear error correction. If I did hear it, I doubt I would actually recognize it. But, then again, there are some things I will probably never understand.

I mean, why did Kamikaze pilots wear crash helmets?

4yanx, just for clarification, I don't have any fingerprints on my CDs.

I always hold them by the EDGES when wiping them against my pant leg.

Sean, with all due respect, I have to question the audible effects of error correction. If the percentage of error correction must increase in correlation to using either the edge marker or CD mat, why do they sound better using either of these methods?

And Sean, I am not speaking solely based on my own personal listening experiences. I am also considering other individuals who in some cases have absolutely no knowledge of the equipment being used. These individuals have enough auditory intelligence to accurately discern what actually sounds more "pleasing" to the ear. In most cases the term they have used is "better".

You are fully aware of the process I use for these CD mods. In addition to that I use a Marigo disc. Consistently, the Marigo tightens the bass, opens up the sound stage and adds an overall "natural sounding" effect. Once again, that is not just MY opinion. Now keep in mind, the Marigo is being used in conjunction with a "greened" disc. We won't even go into what this exact process does for DVDs.

I can totally understand error correction both in theory and in application. My questions being, am I hearing it? And if I am hearing it, would it's results be considered detrimental to the sound of what I am hearing? And, in order to provide me with an unbiased response, you must be willing to disregard what "test equipment" is telling you. Because I'm sure that you don't listen to your music through test equipment. Right?

Also, I cannot recall a single incident where "trackability" had been decreased, by displaying an increased level of "drop outs", "skipping", or decreased search/reading ability after doing these mods. Are we both doing something differently?

Sean, please don't misinterpret this as a "challenge of the minds". That is not the case. I am simply respectfully requesting substantiation of your "listening" results vs. printed "test equipment" results.

Because quite frankly, test equipment data reports become totally irrelevant. Our ears are by far the most accurate and verifiable "test equipment" available to us. And the nice part is that they are already calibrated for our own personal usage.

In closing, It IS about the music, isn't it?