Gold CDs sound Darker?

I'm not in the industry right now, but let me say this. Besides being vastly more maliable right down to the "electron microscope" level, gold is supposed to reflect infared wavelengths better than aluminum, and I think it probably does (don't know where the proof is right now, though). That said, it's possible and even likely, that the two CD's you are comparing didn't have the same production process, or even the same master (much less the same "glass master"). So there will be audible differences there. Also, the gold CD might actually be better, with less "digital glare", than the aluminum one. This has been my experience. Also, if the gold CD you are referring to is a MoFi, I've always felt that their "gain 2" process seems to have less air and zip than the aluminum version from the record company, but in turn has more bass dynamics and extension. Just my personal experience...AND IF YOU WANT A BRIGHT-SOUNDING GOLD CD, TRY THE "XLO/REFERENCE RECORDINGS TEST AND BURN IN CD". The Big Band brass track will take your ears off if your system is the least bit "analytical". Also, you need to try AudioQuest "Laser Guide", and the Bedini Ultra Clarifier. You'll thank me later...

Not in the industry either, but agree with Carl. One other thing to consider is that your system may be "tuned" for the sound of the aluminum discs/normal pressings. For example, maybe your system is a little on smoother, mellower side of neutral, which might be hiding some of the glare of the standard discs. Then, when you put in a Gold version, it will sound mellower and smoother, of course. This has been my personal experience, since I own 95% aluminum discs, my sytem also sounds a little lifeless with gold discs. however, in almost all cases, the gold versions have had more inner detail, better rythm and pace, and more realistic timbres. Regarding the Ultra Clarifier, I have noticed LESS of a difference after its use on gold discs, than on aluminum discs. Any comments Carl ??

I don't think there's too much of a difference. It might be less of an improvement for gold ones, but it's hardly perceptible. Maybe fractions of a percentage point of the difference, for what it does with aluminum. (Realize that what's happening to the CD with the Bedini has as much to do with the plastic polycarbonate, as it does with the data layer.) Even CD-R's are vastly improved by both the Bedini and the Laser Guide (and there's zero metal of any kind in them). On your favorite CD's, even several applications of the Laser Guide (buffed properly) get it a little closer to "analog", making the digital "grit" a few more dB quieter. It's not as if the polycarbonate is truely "optical quality", even on DVD's or SACD's. Even the best Carl Zeiss glass lenses for cameras, binoculars, and telescopes must have complex coatings on all surfaces to get maximum performance (called "ultra-multicoating"). If any of these lenses were made from the polycarbonate that CD's are made from, it'd be like looking through dense fog, and you couldn't see much of anything at all. Yes, we're talking about a very thin layer for a CD, but we're also talking an EXTREMELY small area (thru this thin polycarbonate layer) when it comes to what the laser must focus on/through. Much smaller still for DVD and SACD.