In Reply to: RE: Comparison of CD, SHM-CD, and SACD playback posted by fmak on June 22, 2009 at 23:48:02:
"But copying onto a CDR affects the sound!"
Actually, that was the point of doing the copying. If copying couldn't affect the sound then the test couldn't add any value.
If copying results in two CD-R's that sound the same as each other this constitutes some evidence that the bits burned onto the CD-R are the same. If it results in two CD-Rs that sound different, then this constitutes (weaker) evidence that the bits are different. (The evidence is weaker because it could be that the burning process gave different degrees of jitter, and whether this is true or not would depend on the design of the copying process. Or the burning process could be inconsistent in quality even when making multiple copies of the same disc.) Of course using a Digital Audio Workstation as I suggested in my first post is much more definitive as to whether the bits are the same. But unless one already has a computer with an Internet connection to download free trial software, it does cost more than two blank CD-R's. :-)
Perhaps I have missed some aspect of the sonic influence of CD-R's on sound. I am not experienced with their real-time interactions with transports because I never play any disc, CD or CD-R, in real-time. I only play out of RAM memory rips previously made to hard drive.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Comparison of CD, SHM-CD, and SACD playback - Tony Lauck 06/23/0905:57:30 06/23/09 (23)
- RE: Comparison of CD, SHM-CD, and SACD playback - fmak 06:16:16 06/23/09 (22)
- Your post makes no sense.. (nt) - rich121 09:04:53 06/23/09 (21)
- Made perfect sense to me. - Tony Lauck 09:18:28 06/23/09 (20)
- RE: Made perfect sense to me. - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 02:57:41 06/24/09 (4)
- RE: Made perfect sense to me. - Tony Lauck 07:50:24 06/24/09 (3)
- RE: Made perfect sense to me. - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 10:05:09 06/24/09 (2)
- RE: Made perfect sense to me. - Hiro 10:47:51 06/25/09 (1)
- RE: Made perfect sense to me. - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 13:45:59 06/25/09 (0)
- RE: Made perfect sense to me. - CSF 02:52:23 06/24/09 (2)
- RE: Made perfect sense to me. - Tony Lauck 08:19:26 06/24/09 (1)
- RE: Made perfect sense to me. - fmak 09:01:15 06/24/09 (0)
- Tony - navman 13:45:04 06/23/09 (10)
- RE: Tony - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 13:49:23 06/24/09 (8)
- RE: Tony - Tony Lauck 17:59:18 06/24/09 (7)
- RE: Tony - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 23:42:42 06/24/09 (6)
- RE: Tony - Tony Lauck 07:54:17 06/26/09 (5)
- RE: Tony - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 08:24:12 06/26/09 (0)
- " I stand behind my posts. Do your own homework." - Wendell Narrod 08:01:50 06/26/09 (3)
- RE: " I stand behind my posts. Do your own homework." - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 08:43:05 06/26/09 (0)
- RE: " I stand behind my posts. Do your own homework." - Tony Lauck 08:14:29 06/26/09 (1)
- RE: " I stand behind my posts. Do your own homework." - fmak 23:07:33 06/27/09 (0)
- RE: Tony - Tony Lauck 09:35:28 06/24/09 (0)
- RE: Made perfect sense to me. - rich121 09:47:24 06/23/09 (0)