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
If done correctly digital copies can sound better than the original. If done incorrectly digiatl copies can sound worse than the original.
Gboren, jitter most definitely occurs in the digital domain. Do a Yahoo search for "jitter definition" to see some examples. It should be easy to imagine that the "pits" on a CD won't be perfectly timed, and that the quality of the media as well as the burn rate can affect this. I also want to reiterate that music (Redbook) CDs do not have the same error correction method as data CDs!
I burned my cd by using computer cd re-writer @ 3x. The copy sounded about 85-90% of the original. I play them on the Sony XA7ES for comparation (with the high end system ,i.e cables,amp ,preamp and speakers). I think we have to use very good equipments to hear a difference.
"If done correctly digital copies can sound better than the original. If done incorrectly digiatl copies can sound worse than the original."

Could someone elaborate this statement? Frankly I still don't understand how one can get a copied CD that sounds better than the original.

Ake
Great discussion! Please can someone respond to my original question though, which is if I have some copies I made at high speed (for which I no longer have the original), will I get better sound if I copy these 8x copies again to a 1x copy?