Do CD-R's sound the same as originals

Ramstl, in the above comments, I suggest that those who are in doubt, seek out the opinion of experts. Perhaps you missed that part, or perhaps you think you need me to do your homework for you? I'll ask again, why would their comments, when repeated by me, have any meaning for you? Surely you'd doubt their truthfullness/sincerity/accuracy, when viewed thru the filter of being delievered by myself, functioning as an unnecessary middle man. Let me repeat myself.....if you really want to know the truth about CD-R's, and how "digital ain't always digital, how bits ain't always bits", YOU should ask the experts. I WONDER WHY YOU HAVEN'T E-MAILED THEM YOURSELF? WHAT ARE YOU AFRAID OF?

In any case, I certainly will not speak for experts in the field.

I am going to buy a burner this week to compare for myself. All copies on CDR's (which my new Levinson will play, however, my old Muse separates would not) do NOT sound the same as original. I did not say that they sound bad, however, they are not as dynamic as the originals. I find it hard to believe that the $20 transport mechanism compares to the clocking technology and jitter reduction in the solid heavy transport of the levinson that I spent a load of money on. As audioheads have always said, "poop in gets poop out". In other words...the source is VERY important. How can a cheap plastic transport in a cd writer have the accuracy of the high end transport?? If I am wrong...then I need Mark Levinson's home address so that I can send hate mail!! ;) I also think that the discussion above is lacking information. Each of us burns (or wishes to burn) for different reasons. If for backup...for copying friends discs...for experimentation...for making mixes etc. We should also include associated equipment so that we can understand what you are listening "through". I have friends who "SWEAR" that MP3's sound "GREAT"...these are the same people with the Aiwa rack system who are listening to mp3's on $10 headphones. If I give my "bad" cdr copies to friends with run-of-the-mill systems...they can hear no tangible differences. Since I do not seek to be considered an audio "snob", I forgo the discussion with such people who are satisfied with nominal sound quality (but who are music lovers nontheless). I am a music lover and appreciate the ability to get as much as possible from my system. I found that it is very difficult (and expensive) to make digital sound like analog. Due to those that claim that there are NO DIFFERENCES I will spend the $$ and buy a burner and do more tests (worse comes to worse I need one for data backup) For now, however, I find it hard to believe that someome who could hear enough difference in sound to purchase mega-dollar CD players over the Aiwa 10 disc carousel does not hear the difference from originals to their CDR copies. I sincerely hope that I am wrong.

Carl, as I posted earlier I thought that if you had the information you could pass it on. Sorry I upset you with this simple request. Believe me, I am not asking you to act as a middle man. As a matter of fact I could care less if they said it was great or if they said it was bad. I trust my ears and after nearly 20 years or recording semi-professionally, logging over 2000 of live recordings, using state of the art equipment, I consder myself a good judge of transfer equipment. I use "master" tapes recorded in a ORTF/110 degree fashion to reference from and not multi-mic'd "pop" albums recorded by who knows who. The people I know, that are in the "know" would agree that something is going on and that there is a generational loss, as I posted earlier. What I was looking for from you is a friendly exchange of information. Obiviously, information is being exchanged here but it is certainly, at this point, meaningless and unfriendly.

Carl and Joe!!!....man am I laughing!!!!....I posted my last post prior to reading about your streetfight!!! lolololol Anyway...Joe...I gotta tell you...Carl is playing this straight (and I'm not just saying that because I agree with him) C'mon Joe....if it were just x's and o's then why would different components vary so much??? Playing the donkey may require you to carry a heavy load joe! My brother...who was a pro soundman for the motion picture industry....has informed me that on the big $$$ digital equipment in the studios....they actually use a separate cable that acts as a "clock". This clock keeps the timing as precise as possible (more so than on most digital gear). So...even if you only see X's and O's (or -'s)....then wouldn't you agree that if the X's and O's aren't coming out of the digital domain at precisely the correct time that there would be a sound difference??? Forget impedence, power supplies, copper, silver etc....how about TIMING!! Now don't go crazy here...I don't mean that a CDR copy will sound like garbage altogether....I mean....it isn't a distorted garble! I like the photograph analogy. A crisp beautiful picture can be taken from a camera of the same landscape at the same time as a crappy picture from another camera. One may be held steady as a rock on tripod with right aperture settings, clean and precise lens, and meticulously maintained equipment. It seems to me that you are arguing that a multi thousand dollar camera used by a pro photographer would compare to the $10 throwaway camera that I would use if we are standing at the same place at the same point in time photographing the same image. If you look at the pixels...they may closely resemble one another under a microscope...however look altogether different when viewed as a whole. Bye the way...I am 5'7"...and the only way that I will fight either of you is over the internet. How old are we kids? hahahahahahahahahahahaha