Well, it's obvious that this is like just about every other subjective opinion re audio and I don't dispute anyone's belief in what they think they hear. For myself, I have learned after decades of critical listening, numberless discussions such as these, and several controlled blind tests involving disparate equipment and individuals, that we can sometimes fool ourselves into believing something that isn't so. Especially since it almost invariably involves aural memory. I have done three blind tests with DCC, mini-disc, and CDR. The digital-lossy formats are fairly obviously different in most cases, but can sound good occasionally. The CDR test were run as with every other such test I am involved with. I.e., at times during the test sequences, a sample is compared (blindly) with itself. If done fairly, this can be quite revealing. In the case of CDRs, more often than not, when the original was compared to itself, it was called different (by myself and others).The usual listening group has been 4 to 6 persons. I am, of course, aware that many heard distinctions are valid and can usually be supported by evidence. I don't question that a given individual (such as yourself) actually hears what is there. But, I also know from experience that for some, at some times, it isn't. The original question was whether or not CDRs sound the same as their original. My assertion was that if it is truly an accurate copy, it's likely that it does. Of course, I acknowledge that some recording/playback combinations may yield different results. Obviously, there is a divergence of opinion reflected in these many postings. What we might be able to agree on is that sometimes they do and sometimes they don't depending upon when, who and what is involved. I also still record with analog cassette and reel-to-reel. You'll notice that in these various threads, I don't demean individuals or equipment out of hand. My interest is solely in providing an honest opinion based upon experience. I stopped entering pissing contests at about age 22.
