Black cd-r's + audio quality

i wasn't trying to argue

@koba, the details of your ABX test are intriguing and well summarized...thanks for that...also thank you for the layman's examples and explanations of WHY some setups are considered "better" or "worse" than another...that's what i was looking for...

koba, you are contradicting yourself here (those are both from the same post within a line of each other, by the way). How can the writer possibly have an effect on the sound if the changes take place AFTER D/A playback conversion? You are agreeing that the digital content is always the same, so how can the writer possibly be a factor in ANY way in the equation?

I also have some issue with your ABX testing methods because ... well, they're not ABX. In ABX, you are always testing ONLY ONE subject at a time.

A = Original (Reference)
B = Test Subject
X = Unknown (A or B randomly selected by the player guy)

In an ABX, you always play the reference, and then the test, and then the unknown. You then reference back and forth between A and B, trying to identify X. All this means that throwing all nine discs into the player and randomly switching around was a big NO-NO. You should have first ABX'd EACH DISC to the original Queen CD one at a time, trying to hear the differences (IF ANY), and then gone forth and ABX'd the discs to each other one at a time, again trying to listen for differences (IF ANY).

Also, in a test such as this, the differences are so subtle, that ABX in no way can tell you what sounds better than what. Simply being able to ID the discs correctly is only the first step; it tells you whether or not your hearing is even good enough to be able to hear the differences. But beyond that, it does not tell you what sounds better, because once you get to this high of a level, "better" is simply an interpretation. A test like this is much different than ABXing, say ... a CD to a 128 CBR MP3 (which, by the way, you should try because most people cannot hear the difference. It is a real ego-buster. )

LOL, the level of BS in your posts is appalling. Please, stop it with the holier-than-thou attitude. The "level" of your sound system means jacksh*t when the digital audio BEFORE D/A conversion is always EXACTLY THE SAME. If you are hearing differences, it means your ears (and quite possibly your ego) are the source of the problem.

Try the 128 CBR MP3 ABX test I mentioned above (a REAL BLIND test) - you will be surprised.

Look, I'm sorry if I sound like I'm attacking people here. I really don't mean to pick a fight. I'm just pointing out the holes I see here. I'm reading all this, and it doesn't add up. There is NO POSSIBLE way that I can burn the same CD onto two different kinds of (good) media and have it sound different because the digital data of 1s and 0s is EXACTLY THE SAME for both.

I mean ... the laser/power theory that koba suggested might be a way a phenomenon like this could occur, but any effect would be miniscule at best.

The way I see it, the only way different brands of media could affect analogue sound is if the REFLECTIVITY of the dye affected the READABILITY of the disc in the player (aka, read errors), but again, if we're dealing with only good media here, any observed effects would be minimal. Also, this facor wasn't mentioned by anyone one in this thread, so based on the factors already discussed, I don't see any evidence to indicate that such phenomena is real beyond perception - I blame the placebo effect.

The assertion that certain kinds of CD-R dyes will "colour" the sound played back by an analogue CD player is just utter bull.

Well all I have to say in this matter is that the original always sounds clearer at a higher volume than a copy.

My dad was playing some originals in his car then listened to the CD-R backups and it does sound a bit less clear and more basy in the backups when put to a high volume.

However, all the copies sound the same. No copy sounds much better than another copy so I'd have to agree with CD-Rs all sounding about the same. Black cd-rs wont make a difference.

OK first of all even if the flow of 1 and 0s is the same as the original Jitter, C1 errors, sharpness of pits and lands can vary alot depending on the burner used. What this means: readability of the disc can vary depending on burner used and this can influence sound quality even if the 1 and 0s are the same.

Some pressed discs have more Jitter/C1 errors etc than a copy. So a Qcheck would give better results with the copy than the original and sound better (this is often the case with copy controlled CDs but can also be found with normally presed standard audio CDs).
Now about all copies sounding the same: The quality of the media has a big influence. Also some players do not read copied discs as well as pressed ones. When lasers inside the player get old some players even refuse to play CD-Rs at all over night while still being able to play pressed ones with out problem.

Unless the copy is burned poorly, shouldn't it provide the same digital data to the player's DAC as the original CD? If it's the same data hitting the same DAC in the same manner, the sound reproduction should be equivalent, no?

If that's true, then the only way a duplicate can sound different from the original is if the data reaching the DAC is different. I guess the only way for that to happen would be due to error correction performed when reading the CDs.

I know I'm out of my league, here... just looking for some enlightenment.

The data to the DAC can be the same but this does not mean that the data exiting the DAC or the speakers is the same. For example when a disc needs more servo tracking to be read than a other one more noise is produced in the player. This noise may not affect the digital part but the analog part of the output or the clock generator. This noise can change the quality of the output. There are other noise sources in a normal CD player too like the power circuit etc.
That is also why some very highend CD transporters have a external power circuit, external clock, external DAC and external amplifier. This is to ensure that the noise from the power supply, servo tracking etc does not interfere with the clock, DAC etc.

See, this is what I mean. This is quite possibly the ONLY explanation as to how there could be a discrepancy in the sound. But any effect created by this noise would be too minuscule to even be observable by our ears. Lasers are strictly rated at certain frequencies and such. The amount of power deviation that would even be ALLOWED by the hardware would be TINY.

The only other possibility is the one I brought up about dye reflectivity, which is basically what you were saying about the pits burned. But this factor is eliminated as well if the media is of generally high quality (TY, Maxell, etc). One other instance in which this factor could occur is if a certain standalone's laser was particularly picky. But usually in a situation like that, the disc will either play correctly, or it will refuse to read altogether.

To sum up, I see no real evidence to prove that this phenomenon exists beyond placebo effect. koba, you should really try redoing your test following the ABX method, I'm sure it will bring up some interesting results (or not so interesting, depending on how you look at it). HydrogenAudio.org has some EXCELLENT guidelines on performing proper ABX testing. I always use them as a reference.

Thanks for the knowledge... I'm glad my hearing isn't any better, or I could be out a few thousand bucks!

This is the sillies thread I've ever read. lol

I realize this is old but...
1st: To get the best quality out of YOUR BURN, set your read speed at the slowest speed your burner supports. This will make sure the data will be burned to the disc as accurate as possible.
2nd: The color of the disc has absolutely nothing to do with sound quality.
3rd: good job to those of you who are trying, but all consumer grade players now-a-days are standardized units that are 44.1khz @ 16 bit. Older units started at 1bit.
4th: No matter how good your DAC is, when you mix something down to CD it HAS TO BE 44.1khz @ 16 bits, otherwise it will not play on a consumer player.
44.1khz @ 16 bits is the standard for CD audio playback.

Unless you have bionic ears, there is no way you could hear the effect of a random 1 or 0 being dropped or switched during the burning process.

If you hear a difference it's because you want to believe it, or you have outboard gear that changes the sound.

Now we do have 24 bit players, but they are $$$$$


seriously, I wonder about some of you. lol
(-;

You obviously haven't read our Quest.

*notices that this thread had been dead for two years*

Generally I have found this to be true of the black cd-r media I burned back in 2001 (memorex brand - with the gold printing on the top - not necessarily designated for "music"):

- I have not found any cd player that refuses them.
- There has been no "media rot" or disintegration of physical disk over time
- Even the most scratched and beaten examples have still played with no issues!!

This may be due to the fact that they were reasonably thick and solidly constructed as opposed to the flimsier products, and I believe that the black color does discourage some refraction of the laser which is why the more traveled examples are still usable. Also being an audiophile, I don't think the actual sound content was any better or worse than the sound of any playable disc that I recorded the same info. HOWEVER, the black ones have lasted longer in terms of playability. I have not been able to test the green accented memorex discs over time the same way, but I think the most logical conclusion is that the black plastic probably doesn't disrupt the laser as much in the instance of surface imperfections, and maybe the dark color discourages certain kinds of light hungry media munching fungi. Either way I do like the black cds just because I find they don't error or skip as much during playback as their clearcoated peers. This also holds true for those that I used to store data. They are now my preferred choice when I can find them.