This isn’t new news, but Andy Fawcett revisited the topic of CD-R quality on Audiophilia.com, so it seems like a good time to revisit the notion that black-shaded CD-Rs produce better sound than their silver counterparts.
It seems as if disc color shouldn’t make a difference. Digital 1s and 0s are transferred from one disc to the next, offering an exact copy of the original. We even have programs to confirm the completeness of the transfer.
Still, writes Fawcett, the reality “is that when auditioned in a decent system, the burned disc typically sounds a little less impressive than the original . . . despite the computer confirming that its data is bit-for-bit identical.”
Burned discs typically are silver, however. Many insist that black discs (which can be dark blue or purple) are different. Why is up for interpretation; one theory has the dark shade absorbing excess laser light rather than reflecting it onward or diffracting it within the disc itself.
Writes Fawcett: “Compare a recording burned to a black disc against the same recording burned to a silver disc . . . and the likelihood is that the black disc will sound noticeably, even significantly better. There’s a sense of clarity and dynamic expression to the black disc that leaves the silver copy sounding horribly muddy. . . . A number of friends have tried it, and the verdict has been unanimous.”
But Fawcett didn’t stop there, going so far as to claim that not only do black copies sound better than silver ones, but in many instances they also sound better than the originals — both to him and to friends in the know. Check out any number of message boards for confirmation or refutation of this.
The answer, of course, is the same here as it is for all audiophilia – the ultimate test is subjective; whatever sounds better to the listener is better. 1




