Burned CDs can sound better than the original?


I recently heard a rumor that some CD burners can actually produce a CD copy that sounds slighlty better than the original. As an Electrical Enginner, I was very skeptical about this claim, so I called some of my reviewer friends, along with some other "well informed" audiophiles, to verify this crazy claim. Guess what, they all said : "With some particilar burners, the copies do sound slightly better!" I did some investigation to why, after all, how can the copy sound better than the original? So far I've heard everything from "burned CD's are easier to read", to "the jitter is reduced during the buring process". Has anyone else experienced this unbeleivable situation? I'm also interested in other possible explanations to how this slight sonic improvement could be happening.
ehider
First off, CD-Rs, when done at 1X speed are certainly as good as the originals, IMO. And early on, I was convinced that some of my CD copies actually sounded more "crisp", or very slightly more "live" than the originals. I have no explanation for this, and I would not be willing to be blind tested on it. I am very pleased, amazed even, at the quality of CD copies. I use a Pioneer 739 CD dubbing recorder, so there are no external ICs. Cheers. Craig
I can make a provably bit-perfect copy from an XRCD with my computer-based CD copier, and I can make a provably bit-perfect copy of a CDR with same, so I'd be at a loss to explain why an XRCD sounds worse when a mainstream mastering sounds better. I'd also be at a loss to explain why a CDR can't be read better than 95% reliably in a audio CD player when it can be read perfectly in a computer CD drive.

At the physical copying level, assuming computer-based, bit-for-bit copying, the same thing is going on regardless of the source (XRCD, mainstream mastering, or CDR). There's no ADC or DAC going on and it's not clear to me how jitter could be involved in any way. The only potential thing left is something to do with how an audio CD transport reads a CDR vs. a "normal" CD, something that makes it deficient to a computer CD drive. -Kirk

You hit the nail on the head. Many people think that LESS resolution and LESS dynamics sounds better. If you listen on a reference system, the difference will blow you away. CD-R machines like the Pioneer produce a more accurate copy than computer CD burners. The accuracy of a copy is ALWAYS <= the original. Stuck with those darn laws of physics and the really poor Red-Book standard for CDs. The beauty of digital is that you can compare recordings without listening to them. You can look at 2 recordings next to each other and compare dynamics, highs, accuracy of reproduction, transients etc. Why don't recordings sound like live performance: less dynamics, that's it. Our playback media and equipment can't handle the dynamics that you'd need for sounding live. It's even more evident with CDs over LPs and with SS instead of tubes. Of course if your equipment could handle it, where would you find a room that could handle it?
In my system - absolutely yes - but read on (I find it's mostly a mechanical thing (jitter and pit burning):

It's not about compression or anything "added" in the process. More like a stripping out and re-aligning kind of thing. And, if a cd is well produced (and especially, I find, pressed) you may not hear much of a difference. But for about 90% of the commercial cd's pressed as dreck out there, I find I get extremely pleasing results, a more natural sound, jitter reduction, etc.

Years ago, when CD-Burners first appeared at the high-end of the consumer market some articles were written regarding the following (this was before CD burners came down to today's prices, so, from what i've seen in most rags, this info was apparently forgotten - the same question gets asked reviewers over and over - with amazingly new and apparently speculative/un-researched answers - shameful reporting here lately).

In about 1996-97, as a then member of my local audio society, I was lucky to hear a demonstration from our regional (probably national) Meridian rep (now, sadly deceased) of their new high-end CD-R. He had us all bring our cd's that we brought for his demo up to the burner and he copied tracks to a master cd.

He played back all tracks of the various categories of music on a high-end system; first the regular cd, then the burned track. It was pretty easy to hear the difference - smoother, more musical, more detail, yada yada, - a better recording on the burned track - and even better on the SECOND copy he burned from the first (it was neat to hear this difference on a recording of a rainstick someone had within a song)! But this is seemingly impossible to the mind!(especially for those of us who have meticulously made copies LP/CD onto tape and suffer the slow degradation of these precious tapes over the years - I still cry out in my sleep).

Un-thinkable that a recording could sound better than the "orig." until one considers the media one is actually working with and has the facts:

1. Many CD's are pressed with inherent jitter built in and a good CD-R chain will re-clock for the better - up to 2 re-clockings improve the situation, then rapidly diminishing returns. So, we're removing something - jitter.
I think it was Paul McGowan (when of Genesis Tech) said he used to burn cd's, removing jitter, et al, and use the CD-R's to show off his systems in their demos - obtaining superior sound (with the CD-R tracks he played as his secret weapon).

2. On most industrially pressed cd's the pits are not laid out in the perfect spiral that your player's laser servos would love to have! The dot projection of the spiral is all over the place. And - wait for it - generally, the better CD-R blanks are perfectly "pre-grooved", so when you copy, it's puttin' dem pits down in a better spiral = 1. your tracking mechanisms in your player aren't missing as much (and less digital musical error correction is applied by the player), and 2. player laser servos aren't firing their micro-blasters to keep up as much, and as some mfr's have recently said laser servo noise was a big problem, so the less they are called on to help over-track, etc. the better your sound, unless ya got their brand of expensive transport, etc. When the grooves are in line, the sound is, well, groovy-baby!

3. On most CD's, the aluminum reflection layer is actually pressed into the pits already laid in the plastic (or something like that), with drop outs occurring where the aluminum doesn't go down into the pits in places. With a good burner burning on good media, you are hopefully avoiding these kinds of pressing errors.

ONE WAY TO "ROLL-YOUR OWN":
Alright - how I make CD copies at home (up to now, I do it on my PC, without using the new stereo component type of CD-R burner players):

A few years ago, at the same audio society's meeting, I realize I put my foot in my big mouth, telling an older newbie (whom stated he had a computer literate son whom pressed CD-R's and got less than satisfactory results) that his son must have done something wrong during burns. I stated that I only knew of getting better results after I burned CD's. Though I invited him to my house, we never got together to understand the slightly different ways we burned cd's.

I now realize I was wrong - all copies ain't that great and that his son must have been using an ATAPI CD-Rom to feed his CD burner (don't do this if you want improved copies). ATAPI did not, in those days, transfer CD-track data in an all digital domain (no reclocking, etc).

When after a brief experiment a couple of months ago, I burned a cd going from PC ATAPI CD-ROM to SCSI burner. The copy was WORSE than the orig. - as if the burner had re-recorded the music tracks in an analog fashion, instead of keeping an all digital pathway (I d'unno, but that's how awful it sounded)! Thankfully, years ago, burners were generally always SCSI and would not recognize a direct feed from any ATAPI CD-Roms. I've made many great cd's, without realizing the extra (and I mean extra) I paid for SCSI really did pay off here.

Sooo, I find the safest, best way is to use an all digital SCSI chain. I use a Plextor burner and writer - both SCSI. The data gets reclocked upon burning (i now use 3rd party software to rip/re-clock to my hard-drive then burn).

What I use:

A Plextor ULTRAPlex CD-ROM is recommended for reading for the convenience of burning "on-the-fly" in the all digital domain(at today's available speeds, CD-ROM speed is not really important here)

Plextor Plexwriter 12/10/32 SCSI Burner(I think the TDK burner - popular now - uses the same burner hardware). Most Plextor SCSI burners over the years (and my trusty old Philips CDD-2000) will perform exceptionally well.

For software, I use the error-correction enabled Plextor ripper (or any 3rd party ripper with jitter correction) that comes with the Plexwriter.

For burning, I use - Ahead's "Nero Burning Rom" burning using the Audio wizard.

I now rip tracks to my hard-drive, order them as I want, burn them to CD-RW disc, then repeat the process for the 2nd copy to permanent CD-R. I use Verbatim "Datalife" CD-R blanks (with me, it's always been Verbatim). Imation, and Sony, and some others, make great blanks as well.

My result - I can even hear the copied cd's superiority, naturalness in my car (and A/B'ing for non-audiophile friends has ended up in them picking the copy).

Anyway, my 4 1/2 cents worth

Take Care
The burner's and the software have come a long way in the past couple of years. Before all reading was done real-time which has to degenerate the signal and there was no reclocking available. I'll have to completely upgrade my hardware and software and try this out. What are Ahead's "Nero Burning Rom" and Audio wizard.