does anyone sharpie thier CD's???


its amazing. take a wedge sharpie, and color in the outermost edge of the CD.. then color in the center flat area, and the innermost edge... when you hold the CD up to light, you should not see any coming through..... so actually before you do this, pick a track, turn it up and listen,,,,, then color in the disc, without adjuting the volume, listen again..... i get more volume, calrity and depth...... check this out!!
jonnytanner

Showing 6 responses by metro04


The two pianos may not sound the same, but an "audio spectrum analyzer" should reveal their personal characteristics (harmonic fundamentals, tone, amplitude, etc) as to why they sound different (analogue audio).

As Shadorne explained, and other than the possibility of minimizing correction errors, how can the digital bit stream be modified by mearly painting the CD edge or backside?

Sharpie - schmarpie! I'm sure some "Audiophiles" know right away when their 3-year-olds take some 1/2" diameter Crayons to the Steinway! Where's the harm in letting them try their little Picasso hand at Daddy's CD collection?

Pretty funny, Sugarbrie!

Freemand: We've all read similiar "unsubstantiated" claims regarding just about everything audio related. Humans have been claiming to see, hear, smell, and taste all kinds of things since the beginning of man, much of which can be, and has been disproven by ivestigation/research (science). All one has to do is observe the high medical-placebo percentages, nevermind all the UFO-sighting claims.

You wouldn't have your beloved audio equipment/media if it wasn't for science! And, what claims would audio manufacturers (including Machina Dynamica) be writing in their brochures, other than the science-related data that everyone reads and compares?


9rw: Yes, your point is true as well, but Scientists are continuously striving for proof and understanding. I'd feel a whole lot better if renowned research teams submitted "proven" technical findings over financially-motivated manufacturerÂ’s claims. This "subjective" hearing nonsense wouldn't fly in any legit research organization (Science/Engineering firms, Universities, NASA, etc) without absolute technical proof/explanation. IMO, I feel ALL claims should require proof by whatever means, including DBTs or equivalent. Otherwise, it's no better than the "unregulated" vitamin, personal healthcare products, or similar "subjective" claims markets.

Freeman: "I think this is mans worshiping at the alter of science as their god. everything has to be explained by science and it sadly trickles down into audio!!!!!. Even a fun hobby of just listening to audio. This is listening to music."

"Trickles down into audio!!!!!"? WHAT?!
Don't know where you've been hiding, but it took "science" to design the first amplifier ever made. Audio equipment, as you know it, is merely an advancing bi-product - cultivated into marketable electronics. Just about every audio manufacturer touts improved scientific attributes over previous models, or the competition's, and is what mainly perpetuates sales.

Are you honestly telling us that you've never read/compared a manufacture's claimed specifications, or read technical explanations for why their product design is superior to another? Every aspect of this evolving hobby encompasses science, whether you realize it or not. To so many audio hobbyists, HiFi may appear to be the electronics frontier, with but a tiny fraction actually understanding HOW electronics work, thus susceptible to influence by the marketing "machine", or documented psychological reasons.

"...back to college!" is right!