Burned CDs can sound better than the original?


I recently heard a rumor that some CD burners can actually produce a CD copy that sounds slighlty better than the original. As an Electrical Enginner, I was very skeptical about this claim, so I called some of my reviewer friends, along with some other "well informed" audiophiles, to verify this crazy claim. Guess what, they all said : "With some particilar burners, the copies do sound slightly better!" I did some investigation to why, after all, how can the copy sound better than the original? So far I've heard everything from "burned CD's are easier to read", to "the jitter is reduced during the buring process". Has anyone else experienced this unbeleivable situation? I'm also interested in other possible explanations to how this slight sonic improvement could be happening.
ehider
In my system - absolutely yes - but read on (I find it's mostly a mechanical thing (jitter and pit burning):

It's not about compression or anything "added" in the process. More like a stripping out and re-aligning kind of thing. And, if a cd is well produced (and especially, I find, pressed) you may not hear much of a difference. But for about 90% of the commercial cd's pressed as dreck out there, I find I get extremely pleasing results, a more natural sound, jitter reduction, etc.

Years ago, when CD-Burners first appeared at the high-end of the consumer market some articles were written regarding the following (this was before CD burners came down to today's prices, so, from what i've seen in most rags, this info was apparently forgotten - the same question gets asked reviewers over and over - with amazingly new and apparently speculative/un-researched answers - shameful reporting here lately).

In about 1996-97, as a then member of my local audio society, I was lucky to hear a demonstration from our regional (probably national) Meridian rep (now, sadly deceased) of their new high-end CD-R. He had us all bring our cd's that we brought for his demo up to the burner and he copied tracks to a master cd.

He played back all tracks of the various categories of music on a high-end system; first the regular cd, then the burned track. It was pretty easy to hear the difference - smoother, more musical, more detail, yada yada, - a better recording on the burned track - and even better on the SECOND copy he burned from the first (it was neat to hear this difference on a recording of a rainstick someone had within a song)! But this is seemingly impossible to the mind!(especially for those of us who have meticulously made copies LP/CD onto tape and suffer the slow degradation of these precious tapes over the years - I still cry out in my sleep).

Un-thinkable that a recording could sound better than the "orig." until one considers the media one is actually working with and has the facts:

1. Many CD's are pressed with inherent jitter built in and a good CD-R chain will re-clock for the better - up to 2 re-clockings improve the situation, then rapidly diminishing returns. So, we're removing something - jitter.
I think it was Paul McGowan (when of Genesis Tech) said he used to burn cd's, removing jitter, et al, and use the CD-R's to show off his systems in their demos - obtaining superior sound (with the CD-R tracks he played as his secret weapon).

2. On most industrially pressed cd's the pits are not laid out in the perfect spiral that your player's laser servos would love to have! The dot projection of the spiral is all over the place. And - wait for it - generally, the better CD-R blanks are perfectly "pre-grooved", so when you copy, it's puttin' dem pits down in a better spiral = 1. your tracking mechanisms in your player aren't missing as much (and less digital musical error correction is applied by the player), and 2. player laser servos aren't firing their micro-blasters to keep up as much, and as some mfr's have recently said laser servo noise was a big problem, so the less they are called on to help over-track, etc. the better your sound, unless ya got their brand of expensive transport, etc. When the grooves are in line, the sound is, well, groovy-baby!

3. On most CD's, the aluminum reflection layer is actually pressed into the pits already laid in the plastic (or something like that), with drop outs occurring where the aluminum doesn't go down into the pits in places. With a good burner burning on good media, you are hopefully avoiding these kinds of pressing errors.

ONE WAY TO "ROLL-YOUR OWN":
Alright - how I make CD copies at home (up to now, I do it on my PC, without using the new stereo component type of CD-R burner players):

A few years ago, at the same audio society's meeting, I realize I put my foot in my big mouth, telling an older newbie (whom stated he had a computer literate son whom pressed CD-R's and got less than satisfactory results) that his son must have done something wrong during burns. I stated that I only knew of getting better results after I burned CD's. Though I invited him to my house, we never got together to understand the slightly different ways we burned cd's.

I now realize I was wrong - all copies ain't that great and that his son must have been using an ATAPI CD-Rom to feed his CD burner (don't do this if you want improved copies). ATAPI did not, in those days, transfer CD-track data in an all digital domain (no reclocking, etc).

When after a brief experiment a couple of months ago, I burned a cd going from PC ATAPI CD-ROM to SCSI burner. The copy was WORSE than the orig. - as if the burner had re-recorded the music tracks in an analog fashion, instead of keeping an all digital pathway (I d'unno, but that's how awful it sounded)! Thankfully, years ago, burners were generally always SCSI and would not recognize a direct feed from any ATAPI CD-Roms. I've made many great cd's, without realizing the extra (and I mean extra) I paid for SCSI really did pay off here.

Sooo, I find the safest, best way is to use an all digital SCSI chain. I use a Plextor burner and writer - both SCSI. The data gets reclocked upon burning (i now use 3rd party software to rip/re-clock to my hard-drive then burn).

What I use:

A Plextor ULTRAPlex CD-ROM is recommended for reading for the convenience of burning "on-the-fly" in the all digital domain(at today's available speeds, CD-ROM speed is not really important here)

Plextor Plexwriter 12/10/32 SCSI Burner(I think the TDK burner - popular now - uses the same burner hardware). Most Plextor SCSI burners over the years (and my trusty old Philips CDD-2000) will perform exceptionally well.

For software, I use the error-correction enabled Plextor ripper (or any 3rd party ripper with jitter correction) that comes with the Plexwriter.

For burning, I use - Ahead's "Nero Burning Rom" burning using the Audio wizard.

I now rip tracks to my hard-drive, order them as I want, burn them to CD-RW disc, then repeat the process for the 2nd copy to permanent CD-R. I use Verbatim "Datalife" CD-R blanks (with me, it's always been Verbatim). Imation, and Sony, and some others, make great blanks as well.

My result - I can even hear the copied cd's superiority, naturalness in my car (and A/B'ing for non-audiophile friends has ended up in them picking the copy).

Anyway, my 4 1/2 cents worth

Take Care
The burner's and the software have come a long way in the past couple of years. Before all reading was done real-time which has to degenerate the signal and there was no reclocking available. I'll have to completely upgrade my hardware and software and try this out. What are Ahead's "Nero Burning Rom" and Audio wizard.
Hi Bluesman -

Nero Burning ROM is a software package - I think, the best consumer level ($50.00 or so) out there. The company that makes it is called "Ahead". Can be found - and downloaded from the WEB. See their site for compatibility. The "Audio" wizard is simply the icon to use from the series of options they give you as icons withing these software packages. i.e. click the "Create Audio CD" icon, etc. Sorry for the confusion, I stated this because in some pkgs, you can duplicate a CD as bit for bit data, but you won't get any jitter reduction, but instead be transferring all the original garbage as bit for bit copies instead of getting any reclocking.

Regarding other software - I did, however, get very good results from the older Adaptec Easy CD creator v3.5 - before ROXIO - using the SCSI chain. I can't comment on the ROXIO version).

But Nero Burning ROM is FASTER and keeps up with a fast burner. I can assemble complilations in 15 minutes on my hard disk and burn them in 5 mins with my 12/10/32 SCSI drive.

Take Care
More on CD burning:

It seems that most of us want two functions:

1. Transfer of music LP, etc to the CD medium - we dream about high quality copies. Stereo component player/burners seem to do this the best.

2. CD to CD copying - compilations, or just reburning to get better sound ( I found with my old CD ref player, if it would not read, or skip on the commercial CD, I could burn a copy of the CD and it would both sound better and actually play. Computer burners/software seem to excel at this.

So, it's important, if you want to do both of the above and if you want all the convenience in one component - either a stereo system component player/burner, or at your PC - sit down and make out a budget at the quality level you can afford. (PC = soundcard, SCSI burner and/or reader)

For most of us that don't have $500.00 computer sound cards, not to mention the inconvenience of trying to record into your noisy PC, a stereo component CD-R/CD-RW such as Marantz, etc., is better at copying various sources to a CD than it actually is at CD to CD transfer (it may sound same, but won't necessarily re-clock and improve a cd over the orig. - many recent reviews of these player recorders seem to confirm this).

And the PC CD chain, for me, at least, almost always creates an improved copy going CD to CD if the right SCSI component and software chain is used - markedly so, but even with a soundblaster "Live" card, a PC's copying capabilities from various sources - LP, etc then to CD is limited and not very appealing for the effort.

So for now, we can always solve both issues for the highest quality by adding more components we're not sure we really want!!! Spend Spend Spend - the audiophile quagmire until some genius puts it all in one easy package that's affordable (I'm in the market for the Marantz DR-17 to accomplish all my goals, but that ain't exactly what i consider affordable).

Take Care
Regarding item #2 of my previous post - regarding imperfect pit spiral/alignment on factory CDs. Note: this covers either the case where the hole of the plactic cd is off-center, though the spiral is perfect, or the case where the cd is centered correctly, but the spiral is laid down poorly.

If you want to know how much your cd player is working overtime: I just read an article in Stereophile - Sept 2001 - ref. pg79-80, where Jonathan Scull reviews a $25,000.00 CD transport called the 47 Labs 4704 PiTracer, and, as an aside, is able to note the incredible work the transport mechanism is going through to simply read the cd!

I can imagine that a degradation in sound happens when most cd players mechanically track - I'd love to see him compare a good CD-R's tracking to a factory CD's on this machine!!

In my systems, a properly reclocked/burned cd can equal the effects of a major component upgrade.

Take Care