Redbook Keeps Surprising


I was a Best Buy to get a memory card reader for my computer. Looked at the CDs and saw a few in the bargain bin that I would like to have, only a few dollars. Came home, ripped them with DB power amp, picked the best cover art. Transferred to my Aurender through the NAS and played away. WOW, impressive sound and I really enjoyed them both. I like the High Res downloads and my SACD collection but am often really impressed by good Redbook CD. It really is the music that counts. 
128x128davt
One more time, and let's see if I can make this clear. One can do what one wants with the original recording. One can play it (but not in public), resell it, give it away, throw it away or rip it *for one's own personal use*. The one thing one can not do is keep the ripped copy of a CD or a track and then dispose of the original, or vice versa. It's neither legal or ethical to make copies of a CD, Redbook or otherwise (think "Enhanced" CDs), and sell them or give them away. Likewise. it's neither legal or ethical to make any kind of a copy of a recording and then sell or give away the original. Possession of the original is one's license for "fair-use" of the copy. If one doesn't have the original, one can't have a copy, no matter how one came by it.

It's not at all like selling or giving away a used bicycle. You haven't duplicated the bike. If  one starts exactly duplicating the bike, and potentially violating associated patents and trademarks, and then giving away or selling the duplicates of the bike, you'll then have a similar situation, and a potential legal problem. It's the same with recordings. It is absolutely illegal and unethical to give away that burned duplicate of a CD. Playing the duplicate in your car makes no difference. You don't own the music on that duplicate CD to give away. The Grateful Dead can do what they want, but most people in the music industry aren't in the position or of the disposition to be so generous.

Copyright law can be bizarrely complex, and highly lawyered. But the basics are pretty straightforward, and fair to all.

BTW, whether or not a ripped copy of a CD sounds better/different/worse than the original will certainly have much to do with the format it's ripped to and then what hardware is used for playback. An mp3, especially at a low bit rate, played through some cheap USB arrangement won't sound nearly as good as a WAV file that is an exact duplicate of the original and then played through a high-end system.
lp2cd,

Your clarification has been most helpful.
I was actually thinking of donating my entire physical cd collection to the local library but it looks like I can't do that now.  :(

J.
Ripped great CDs -- or very good ones -- sound extraordinary on my Lampizator DSD Komputer (output to my Lampizator Lite 7 DAC).  And most of mine are ripped via the WAV format, although I have a fair share of FLAC and Apple Lossless files as well. 
bsmith 6-26-2016 5:15 pm
someone explain to me why cd’s sound better to me than the file of that cd.
If the software used for ripping (and the settings of that software that were used) assures that the file is a bit-perfect copy, and if playback in both cases uses identical hardware (i.e., the CD and the ripped file are played back from the same computer or other device), one possibility is that the difference is due to differences in computer-generated electrical noise that is riding on the signal provided to the DAC (whether that DAC is internal or external to the computer), resulting in differences in jitter.

Of course if the rip is not done in a manner that assures bit-perfect quality, or if the playback hardware is different in the two cases, anything is possible.

Regarding the copyright law issues that have been discussed, LP2CD has provided outstanding answers IMO. With regard to the bicycle analogy, another way to look at it is that both the new bike and the one that is given away (and used by someone else) have been purchased and paid for. That is not the case, of course, when a CD is ripped and then given away.

Regards,
-- Al

@lp2cd 

Please provide a more specific reference regarding the illegality of disposing-- for profit or otherwise-- of an original CD after making a digital copy for personal use.  The RIAA seems to be vague on this point.

http://www.riaa.com/resources-learning/about-piracy/

It is clear that it is illegal to sell copies, but I see nothing regarding prohibition on resale of the original-- which is not only protected by fair use, but also by legal transfer of ownership.  The issue of reselling an original appears never to have been litigated, and the legal blogs I see on the subject are full of controversy.  The Betamax and Groakster cases and a 2013 Supreme Court decision protecting the resale of textbooks seem to be the principal precedents.  At this point the resale of an original appears to be legal arcana.