CDRs sound better than original!!!

What you say is true and I've heard and read this many times. However, it's only true if the signal remains digital. I'm speculating as to why, but the CDR burns the pits, commercial disc are stamped.

i have burned over 200 CDs, and have never heard the original sound any different from source CD, DAT or WAV. I use a memorex PC IDE drive and burn at 1 or 2x

Hi Ejlif; I'm glad you posted this question as I've been copying CDs with a Pioneer W739 CD-R and have observed the same thing you did. The CD-Rs are more "crisp, clean, and live", and thus more involving, but notably they are not brighter, at least not in a bad way. Bmpnyc explained that it may be a slight roll off of bass during recording, thus empasizing the mids and highs, But its been my experience that bass is also more articulate. The W739 is only $725. list, or $600. actual-- I think the Tascam is more expensive. Is it a pro model? I like CD-Rs. Craig.

The Tascam is a pro unit. I have also read this, although I have not experienced this. I only burn from mastered DATs. I should try it to see if I hear a difference. The theory I have come across is that the pits on the CDR are more clearly defined and thus easier for the laser to read. I imagine that it then makes it easier for the converter to do its job. John Atkinson wrote about his findings sometime ago, and if my memory serves me correctly he was also using the pioneer system. Although, I maybe wrong. It was around 1997, I think.