If your CD's are harsh, try this

Cdc, the copies are digital, unless you make a "copy of a copy" on a consumer machine, which will then be analogue.

I can't tell a difference, but some big guns agree with you that they sound different and better.

Charlie

Cdc is correct (not about the analog part) but I have noticed that some CD-R's do sound better - less edgy - than the originals.

Some digital dude told me a few weeks ago (not sure how true it is) that some CDs were produced out of phase and putting them on a CD-R corrects the phase issue. Whatever.

All I know is that burning (using Exact Copy) does make most CD's sound different than the original. If you like the results then you might consider it better.

Thank you Sc53 and Danvetc. On my girlfriend's Marantz CDB, when making a copy of a copy, "analog recording" lights up on the display. It only allows a digital copy for the first generation. Although on one CD it did unlimited digital. I guess that CD was not encoded with SCMS.
Being upset that I messed up a copy, played both for her single blind test and she said she liked the analog. She agreed the digital copy was more accurate but preferred the sound of the analog version. I don't think this is snakeoil and there should be measurable differences between an analog and true bit for bit perfect digital copy.
I thought the analog sounded more lifeless in general as well as highs more rounded. My guess is analog looses the leading edge attack on transients. Who says accuracy is always desirable?