Re: [ARSCLIST] Ampex ATR-102 opinion (was MD5 Hash Generators

[Andrew Hamilton <ahamilton@xxxxxxxx>]

On 1/22/08 1:42 PM, "Bruce Kinch" <bckinch@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> One problem with the "bits iz bits" argument is that all sorts of
> tweaks (not just better players/DACS) change (often subjectively
> improving) the sound of CDs - de-gaussing, polishing, trimming, etc.
> One of the nice things a good DAC can do is demonstrate how a
> "bit-perfect" CD-R copy can sound better than the original CD, and that
> is truly weird.


This is truly weird.  I thought that Dr. Dunn's/Prism Sound AES paper on
bit-identical CDs sounding different stated that the differences all
disappeared when using an external DAC.  It's the internal (to the CD
player) DAC which he surmised gets its quartz timing futz'd by the servo
arm's tracking fluctuations caused by a hard-to-read (less reflective) disc.
So a slow burn on compatible media might make a better reference disc than a
fast burn on compatible media (which might make for fewer errors but sound
worse (on a CD player that is using its built-in DACs) and is, ironically,
the better master disc!).

_andrew