Do CD-R's sound the same as originals

Let me put it another way, to see if it is clearer: digital information is discrete, not continuous. It is DIGITAL, not ANALOGOUS. Therefore errors in the information are also discrete, and not continuous. The errors are either there or they are not. If they are not, as is the case with most reasonable copying processes done with a computer, the sound will be the same as the original. If you disagree on scientific grounds, fine, please explain, unles, of course, you are trolling.

You are not a scientist, and I have no reason to debate you on this. You need to ask those who are experts in the field, as I suggest above, if you don't accept what I am telling you. The "digital is digital" argument doesn't apply here, because we are not talking about mere digital data, we are talking about the process of digital audio, which is far from simple. You ought to read a book or two on the subject, and consult a few reference uadio books. Like I said, ask Winston Ma if he thinks CD-R's represent perfect copies of a compact disc. Ask Kevin Halverson. Ask Madrigal Audio Laboratories. Ask any manufacturer of digital media or hardware. I'll not belabor this with someone who his blind to it, and who will not take me at my word. I owe you nothing here at all, Mr. incoherent.

Also, I notice that neither of you have feedback on file here at Audiogon. For me, that speaks volumes about YOUR credibility here. I need to adopt the policy that I'll not respond to those who have less positive feedback than I do. Perhaps that is where this agnaustic and negative attitude comes from (the fact that neither of you have bought or sold anything here). I wonder how that could be? What are you afraid of?

Well, pass me a big plate of crow to eat. After more careful comparison of CDR's to originals, there is an additional brightness and some loss of detail on the copy. On certain originals which are slightly bright to begin with, the copy is definitely brighter, almost to the point of not sounding good. Other originals seem to copy better, with very little "distortion" in the copy. This does require more investigation, as I am copying some songs from discs and then selling the originals. I'd hate to think I am losing the quality of the original to make a permanent copy that sacrifices audio quality for convenience. Trying to keep an open mind and be critical of every aspect of this hobby, or obsession, or whatever it is.

That's a complete turnaround for you Madisonears, and I admire it. Also, that's EXACTLY what I hear. I think of it as a grainy distortion, but one MFSL gold CD's copy actually was more compressed and even quieter sounding (in addition to the graininess)...which was very troubling to me, because I didn't want to buy the original (they're all out of print, and out of business now). Tell this to Ejlif, he thinks copies ALWAYS sound better!!! I CANNOT FATHOM THAT. I've never heard a copy that sounds as good as the original, much less "better". I'm trying one of his, and he wants to send me the original (since my copy is not the exact physically same disc). I say it doesn't matter, because either his original is the same as mine, or it's worse. His copy definitely is not as good as my original (this is Sarah McLachlin's "Mirror Ball"). Also, I recently opened up that Pandora's box called the "green pen". I used to think that it'd be permanent, but this one comes off with rubbing alcohol and a cotton swab, in case you want to remove the green.