Okay, Puremusic, I have done some comparisons that might interest you.
I used a cd by Nnenna Freelon called Live. She has a great voice and the backup is very driving. Also being live there is a clear sense of space. I had already made a RealityCheck cd-r using ClearDisc and ClearBit, the original fluids. I listened to the original which had been cleaned with these same fluids. I then Nespaed the original and listened to it. Then the RC cd-r, and finally that cd-r Nespaed.
The original is quite clean and pleasant. I arbitrarily will assign it a 1. I treated the original at the 60 setting, where 30, 60, and 120 are the choices. It was strikingly better, with more detail, sense of space, and improved dynamic. I would assign it a 1.5. I struggled with these numbers and do not really mean to imply that it was 50% better.
Next I listened to the old RC copy. Sometime I will make a Cool Copy cd-r as I have one now. Thus far I prefer the RealityCheck copies slightly.
The RealityCheck copy would get a 2 on my scale. It was strikingly more detailed than the Nespaed original and had greatly more detail and sparkle. It all so had the drive that I have always found with the RC process, if you stick with the original fluids. The bass was far superior than just Nespaing the original, and this disc has driving bass. There was a greater sense of soundstage depth.
Then the ultimate. I double treated the RC cd-r on the Nespa. The first was a run at 60 and then another at 120. My jaw dropped on hearing this. I was there. Her voice was so distinct and real. The soundstage was quite realistic with incredible detail and realism. I could hear those sitting near where she was singing. I would rate this as a 5, clearly greater than its parts.
My understanding of how the Nespa works would suggest it could be of no benefit to cd-rs as they have no metal layer, but it clearly works better on cd-rs. This is troublesome to me as I have been impressed with what the Nespa does for sacds, which of course, cannot be copied.
Tonight I will make another copy using the RealityCheck of the now Nespaed original. I will probably listen to it first and then Nespa the new copy. Again I am inclined to expect no improvement, but given my prior experience, I will not be at all surprised if further Nespaing adds further.
I know better than to generalize from a single disc, but that is the best I can do for now. |
Norm (Tbg),
WOW, a score of 5 as compared to 1, 1.5 or 2. That is attention getting.Thanks for the info. Great work! The one thing that is consistent in your experiment as well as Leec's and Sksos' experiments is that Nespaing an RC cd-r is beneficial. Leec's results suggest that Nespaing a cd-r before duplication is detrimental. While Sksos Nespad the original CD before duplicating it, he did not give us a comparison between an RC copy of a Nespad CD and a Nespad RC copy of a Nespad CD. Your tonight's experiment should provide this missing piece. Please let us know your outcome.
Best Regards,
John |
Sksos and Leec,
Have either of you compared the sonic improvements made by Intron #8500 Protect and the Reality Check's cleaning fluids PRIOR to duplication. Also, what is the sonic comparison between the DUPLICATES that were made using these two cleaners.
Best Regards,
John |
I can say that the cleaning of the original disc with either cleaner is essential to get the best sound. Also cleaning a blank BLACK CDR before duplicating is also a MUST to get the best possible sound. To not clean a blacn black CDR before copying is a no no. So first clean your original, and the blank CDR, Nespa the original, make the duplication, then Nespa the copy. A simple but well worth process for FULL enjoyment. |
Steve, I, of course, have not tried the 8500, but I cannot agree with you about the benefits of Nespaing the original and the copy.
I actually preferred just Nespaing the RC copy. Nespaing the copy of the Nespaed original did not change my opinion. I am greatly relieved about not having to redo the 60 cds I have already made. All I have to do is Nespa them.
I also did CoolCopy versions of the Nespaed originals but have not yet listened to them.
Basically the Nespaing of the RC copies greatly enhances the realism of the sound stage and gives bass more impact. I can fell the change in my listen chairs vibration.
In passing I treated an sacd that already was improved by Nespaing for 60. I redid it as others have recommended for an additional 120 (I don't know what the unit is here, but I think it is seconds). This greatly improved the one sacd that I treated.
I really have no idea given what I have read about how the Nespa works why it has any effect on a cd-r with no metal layer. Have you asked Nespa about this? |
Norm,
It's fine we don't agree on everything, we all hear different things and we all have different priorities what we listen for. There are several people who feel the RC duplicator is better than the Cool Copy but there MANY more who feel the CC is MUCH better than the RC, no matter, everyone agrees that duplicating is a big benefit.
As for Nesaping an original disc 1st, or just Nespaing the copy, I still hear an improvement doing both. Again, in my system, this always sounds better.
As for why the Nespa can make a CDR sound better, no, I've not asked Japan. Their is a big communication gap on most question I have asked, since I don't speak Japanese and no one at Nanotec speaks English. All I know is I've heard from over 100 customers that ALL agree, there is a positive improvement on ALL formats. Many customers report huge improvements on video discs, a cleaner picture, brighter colors....I've yet to try this since I don't watch any TV.
Keep the reports coming in, love to hear your further experiments.
Steve |
I Nespaed another original and then copied it only to Nespa the copy. This was a Basie big band cd. This time the double Nespaed disc was better than where only the copy was Nespaed. How do I predict when double Nespaing will be better? I don't know, but I will probably not do the remainder of the 60 discs I have already copied.
Once again I used both the RealityCheck and the Cool Copy to make copies. These are the fifth and sixth discs where I used both, but only these two had been treated with the Nespa before copying. On both I prefer the RealityCheck as having a better leading edge and a better sense of the recording stage. I am selling my Cool Copy. |
Tbg, I sold my RealityCheck dup, bought a CC dup but have found just Nespaing at the 30 then again at the 120, is all I need. Yes, a copy "can" sound better but then I don't have the time to LISTEN and isn't that what it's all about?
PS: Forgot, another must is cleaning your CD's with a good cleaner, I've tried most and have settled on this fluid made by the makers of the Nespa unit called Intron Protect #8500. It's quick and easy to put on and sounds better than the original fluid by Mr Louis, that 2 step process was a pain...... |
Leec, I grant that using the RealityCheck cleaners and duplicator, which copies at a much slower rate than even the Cool Copy's Raw Disc copy, takes much time. But knowing how much better the discs sound drives me to doing the entire process.
I have AudioTop digital, RealityCheck original and RealDisc, and several older cleaners around. Of these the ClearDisc and ClearBit originals proves best. Perhaps at some later date I will try the 8500 after the others have been used. My disappointment with RealDisc has put me off for further experiments.
I had hoped that my first disc showed that Nespaing only the copy was best, unfortunately the second showed the benefits of copying both the original and then the copy,.
Now that my tests are done, I will be settling down to enjoying the fruits of this, including listening to vinyl. |
Tbg and Leec, Thanks for sharing your info.
Does anyone know of a modder who is offering modifications for the Reality Check duplicator or the Cool Copy duplicator or any other standalone duplicator (one that doesn't use a computer). Such modifications could include installing a linear power supply (which Gary Loh considers very important), software similar to the Exact Audio Copy or Plex Tools (to guarantee accurate duplication), a Super Clock (to reduce jitter), and a hard drive. Using software to first get an accurate copy onto the hard drive, then using software to select which tracts you want to duplicate from the hard drive onto your black CD-R discs offers a nice flexibility. Making a compilation of several favorite selections from a number of CDs onto a single black disc is more convenient when it comes to listening.
Best Regards,
John |
I have heard of such mods but am unlikely to try them as I think discs will soon all be put on to hard drives with a USB dac playing them. I have pretty good reasons to suspect that duplicate benefits to not pass to the hard drive. I would not be surprised, however, were Nespa benefits on the originals to pass to the hard drive.
I have found myself that computer copies of originals are not the equal of the RealityCheck duplicates and to some degree the Cool Copies. I don't know why this is true.
The power supply on the RC is quite small and must be even smaller on the CC. I also don't like using a transformer on the ac. |
Tgb,
So you must have used your Nespa on many discs now, I value your thoughts (even though I know what I hear) please tell us how much of an improvement you hear after a light treatment?
Lee |
Leec, I do think the Nespa treatment is more significant than duplicating and proper cleaning. Of the many cd-rs I have made already, I found one where Nespaing the original and then making a second cd-r and Nespaing it was better than just Nespaing the cd-rs I had already made.
Being lazy I decided to just Nespa my old copies. In every case there has been a further substantial improvement. I cannot, however, say that I will rely only on the Nespa. It may be a majority of the improvement you can make on cds, but I want it all.
I have abandoned the Audio Desk trimmer on all but my sacds as it make no improvement either on the copies I make of cds. It does improve the originals, but this doesn't seem to transfer to copies made of it.
Curiously the Furatech demagnetizer has a minor effect on cd-rs. Nothing of the magnitude of its effect on cds, however. |
This weekend my wife and I had 3 couples over for dinner. All non-audiophiles but they know about my passion, or obsession as they call it. We were listening to a CD and after 5 minutes I stopped it, I forgot to Nespa it> They asked what the hell I was doing and I said just wait. After a 60 cycle blast I inserted the CD again and the reaction was wow! Especially the woman. They said the top end was easier on the ears, no more, and this is where it's strange, they couldn't discribe it just they now thought an edge was gone, sounded cleaner and more relaxed. One even suggested more dynamic, although they described it as seeming to go softer but louder all at the same time.
Just thought I'd share this experience, I hope this thing never burns out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Has anyone compared sonic difference between CDs treated with Nespa#1 versus the Nespa Pro?
The literature refers that the flash applied by Nespa#1 alone is rated at 1000mW/sec, has a temperature of 5,500K and light intensity of one million Lux. The intensity of the Nespa Pro is much stronger. This may sound stupid, but is there adequate precautions to safeguard accidental exposure, such as vision damage to unknowledgeable persons inadvertently fooling around with these conceptions? |
There is a lid which when opened turns off the mechanism. There is also and on/off switch. Don't drop it in your bath while plugged in. |
