[Scott[_6_]]

On Jul 14, 3:05*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jul 13, 5:24*pm, Scott wrote:

On Jul 13, 4:20 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Jul 13, 4:16 am, Scott wrote:

In an exchange of emails Dennis told me that this particular sonic
defect was CDP dependent. It was in those emails that he gave details
of level matching, time synching and DB protocols.

*This sounds like a test of CDPs ability to handle defective CDs with
high read error rates.

Again with the defects assertion. What was defective?

One of the laser burners. *You said that 2 of 3 systems worked fine.

No that isn't what I said at all. In fact I said nothing on the
matter. but this is what Dennis Drake said.
""Upon further investigation, it turned out that the plant had three
different laser
beam recorders and that one of them sounded different than the other
two."
All three were *different* but none of them were ever said to be
"defective." In fact for all we know thouasnds of titles were cut on
the one burner that produced colored sounding CDs on certain players.
Lesser in quality does nor equate defective. For all we know that
burner was opperating exactly up to it's full capacity and was
considered at that time "by typical measurements" to be working
propperly.


That is they produced CDs that sounded the same on all CDPs.


We don't even know that. They sounded the same on all the CDPs that
Dennis Drake used for his later comparisons. I'm pretty sure Dennis
did not test every make and model of CDP past and present to that day.
Nor do I suspect that he even tested a substantial sample.


The 3rd produced CDs that sounded fine on some players and not so fine
on others. *That tells me that unit was defective in that it produced
marginal
CDs that would not play without audible degradation on some CDPs.


In the same report he talks about th colorations of all but one A?D
converter. Does that mean that all those other widely used A.D
converters were also "defective?" Are you suggesting that all this CD
are either universlly transparent or defective?


How were the CDs
defective? An error in the pressing? How does that happen? How does
this play "better" on one player and not another?

Let's see...it could be all optics are not created equal, or all error
correction
is not created equal.

Inequities are no surprise. That's what the crazy subjectivists have
been claiming from the get go. It is also something that some people
claim have never been a concern in CD playback. inequities are not
always divided by defective and nondefective.



Dennis indicated
that on some CDPs the so called 'defective" discs played perfectly.

Those players optics could handle deficient CDs or they had better
error correction.

IOW they were better sounding CDPs with certian CDs. And who knows how
many of those discs were released into the commercial market? Do we
have any reason to think that Dennis Drake's rigor in persuit of sound
quality was the norm in commerical CD production? I'll bet it was and
is very much the exception.



How can a defective disc ever play perfectly?

You've never heard a scratched CD play perfectly?

Have you ever heard a scratched CD sound thin as opposed to just
skipping or stopping? Not the same thing here. Dennis described
inferior colored sound not skips or stops.



*IME, CDs have to be
rather badly damaged to not play perfectly on a decent player.


IYE what sort of damage leads to the sound that Dennis Drake observed?