Great article on "Analogue Warmth"

[Groucho]

What I find interesting is that those who advocate digital only see just that, to wit digital only listeners. It's tough IMO to make such sweeping statements when such listeners haven't heard an analog comparison in their own rooms.

I am one of those people. I have also never heard any of the no-doubt amazing home theatre 'ambience' algorithms that are out there, yet I make the sweeping generalization that I don't want to hear them. If I did, I might find that I actually preferred them - for some recordings and for a limited time until I became bored with them. But at the same time I don't know that. Maybe they're fantastic.

Should I invest a lot of time seeking some of these systems out to listen to them? Sadly, I say no, because I am a purist. I think it highly unlikely I will hear an artificial algorithm (which is also what "analogue warmth" is) that enhances my listening on all recordings for all time. Life is too short to waste on messing around with such random stuff...

If, for a minute, I thought that there was something wrong with the way my system sounds, I would be looking to change it, but all it does is surprise me time after time with what lies within recordings. No artificial warmth is needed.

 

[bonzo75]

I am old enough to have bought records ,and digital , I have a turntable and files,Tidal and CDs.
I find the mastering/recording trumps format every time.
Keith.

Neither the format nor mastering matters Keith. All you need to do is be true to the source...reproduce accurately whatever format or mastering you have. Seriously true.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

What are "digital nasties" and "lack of substance?" Have they been demonstrated and identified in any kind of even remotely objective testing? No? Then they could just as easily be a preference for muted highs and bloated mids. And have they been demonstrated and identified in any kind of even remotely objective testing? If the answer is no to all, then this is all just audiophiles telling the rest of us what music should sound like. Yeah, I know..."trust your ears." I do. I'm not sure I trust yours, though. A few posts back, someone implied that I couldn't even know if I like digital better than analog unless I was living with a SOTA analog system. By that logic, I'd say unless you live with unamplified music playing in your listening room, you don't know what music sounds like.

Tim

Tim,

I respect where you are coming from.....I 'can' fully enjoy music in any form, context, or way it's presented to me. even when I hear a good tune on the 'Musak' over our company PA system, or the over the radio in the car with the top down. the clock radio in my bedroom can sound good to me. I am not a music snob.

but as an audiophile there are times when I want to hear music sound as good as possible. in these cases it's all about expectations, priorities, and references.

let's say it was important enough to you to spend the time investigating how great redbook could sound. after you put the effort into discovering what the possibilities might be and heard the best possible reference, would your expectations change? would hearing it the best possible way be important? would the difference between where you are at and the very best be sufficient to justify you improving what you now hear?

after reading your viewpoints for 5 years I doubt it's really that important to you. and if you don't care enough to investigate, the posts in this thread talking about PCM nasties are beside the point to you. you are satisfied where you are.

nothing wrong with that.

 

[Purite Audio]

Neither the format nor mastering matters Keith. All you need to do is be true to the source...reproduce accurately whatever format or mastering you have. Seriously true.

Of course the recording/mastering matters, that's what sperates a good recording from bad, a good recording on either format will sound. sublime, likewise a poor recording will sound poor.
Keith.

 

[Rodney Gold]

 

[PeterA]

Peter placing the twin towers of the speakers will provide a wider soundstage ,and the bass bins are crossing around 80Hz ,at that frequency the sound is omnidirectional so it doesn't matter where they sit.
It is generally accepted that reflections from the floor and ceiling are detrimental to good sound ,hence the recommendation for a carpet and perhaps ceiling absorbtion /diffusion.
All good advice I think you will find, perhaps a little more thought before posting in the New Year?
Keith.

Keith, instead of addressing someone's post, you looked at the photo in his avatar and offered him unsolicited advice about his speaker set up and room treatment. It was completely off topic and thus I thought an unnecessary comment. I welcome any advice you can share with me about my system, but please do it in a PM.

 

[amirm]

What I find interesting is that those who advocate digital only see just that, to wit digital only listeners. It's tough IMO to make such sweeping statements when such listeners haven't heard an analog comparison in their own rooms. There are also
Many members here who only have analog for well over 40 years and laugh at the mention of digital. It's also difficult for me to accept with such dogma that a 15 yo $300 DAC gives the same information as current SOTA DAC's. MikeL has done the comparison from the worlds best and still espouses analog to be superior.

Steve, please mention me by name. I don't understand the notion of talking in third-party in front of me .

I grew up as an audiophile with analog reproduction. I had R2R decks, Sony Elcaset, regular cassette, and turntables. This was in 1970s. I also go to shows and spend many hours listening to LPs. So let's not put each other down on some nebulous basis that "he has not heard it."

As I mentioned the article that started this thread is about analog distortions. No one has disputed much of what was mentioned as *distortions*. How come I don't hear about you all hearing those distortions? It is not like there is a shortage of them. They are all over the analog medium and chain. To the extent we are blind to them, let's not all of sudden say that we hear digital distortions that are not even quantified compared to the analog ones staring us in the face.

No one would remotely take these types of claims in your regular profession. I don't for the life of me can figure out when it comes to audio, you don't have any belief in validity of science there. Put your doctor hat on for a moment and tell me why I should believe all of this anecdotal data. Tell me that you have sat through a live vs digital back to analog and could easily tell the problems with digital. Don't tell me that you like recordings in one format versus the other. That has nothing to do with problems of the format. If there is, then show evidence of that.

 

[amirm]

Now there is a good man.

 

[Steve Williams]

When I had only digital I felt that I really enjoyed all the music I played but yet whenever I was at friends' homes who had both I was instantly drawn to the analog format 100% of the time. Maybe it's just me but that's my opinion based on listening to other people's systems. Once I put in a turntable I have been so involved emotionally with my system now that I cannot put it down. I play 3-4 albums per day many of which I also own on CD and/or SACD and again "IMO" there is no comparison. I prefer analog. I have had members of WBF who only have analog, one of whom owned only analog since 1955. Each time he has tried to foray into the digital domain he comes screaming back to vinyl.

In the end these arguments IMO are so damn petty. I have no desire to convert anyone to what I believe but I can say that in all the years I was without analog there was never any doubt in my mind that analog always sounded better when heard in the same system. I merely ask people to keep an open mind. If people are happy with what they listen to that is really all that matters. I guess I am lucky that in all my years of listening in this hobby I am not pestered by those analytic tendencies of others to listen for distal artifacts. At some point one has to just listen and forget about those digital artifacts

 

[Al M.]

after reading your viewpoints for 5 years I doubt it's really that important to you. and if you don't care enough to investigate, the posts in this thread talking about PCM nasties are beside the point to you. you are satisfied where you are.

nothing wrong with that.

Yes, and this again highlights the fact that we all have different sensibilities, sensitivities, perceptions, concepts and priorities.

That is why many people in this discussion consistently talk past one another instead of to one another, without even realizing it (I do believe, Mike, that the both of us actually manage to discuss with one another).

 

[DaveC]

To the extent we are blind to them, let's not all of sudden say that we hear digital distortions that are not even quantified compared to the analog ones staring us in the face.

No one would remotely take these types of claims in your regular profession. I don't for the life of me can figure out when it comes to audio, you don't have any belief in validity of science there. Put your doctor hat on for a moment and tell me why I should believe all of this anecdotal data. Tell me that you have sat through a live vs digital back to analog and could easily tell the problems with digital. Don't tell me that you like recordings in one format versus the other. That has nothing to do with problems of the format. If there is, then show evidence of that.

I am making those claims as are many others. Digital has distortions that are not defined and much more harmful vs easily measurable analog distortions.

And as much as you claim this is unreasonable and unscientific, I am making the same claims about your unwillingness to consider often reported subjective observation as hypothesis.

 

[DaveC]

When I had only digital I felt that I really enjoyed all the music I played but yet whenever I was at friends' homes who had both I was instantly drawn to the analog format 100% of the time. Maybe it's just me but that's my opinion based on listening to other people's systems. Once I put in a turntable I have been so involved emotionally with my system now that I cannot put it down. I play 3-4 albums per day many of which I also own on CD and/or SACD and again "IMO" there is no comparison. I prefer analog. I have had members of WBF who only have analog, one of whom owned only analog since 1955. Each time he has tried to foray into the digital domain he comes screaming back to vinyl.

In the end these arguments IMO are so damn petty. I have no desire to convert anyone to what I believe but I can say that in all the years I was without analog there was never any doubt in my mind that analog always sounded better when heard in the same system. I merely ask people to keep an open mind. If people are happy with what they listen to that is really all that matters. I guess I am lucky that in all my years of listening in this hobby I am not pestered by those analytic tendencies of others to listen for distal artifacts. At some point one has to just listen and forget about those digital artifacts

I do, but at the same time I don't pretend they don't exist. I am happy with the way my system sounds but I know it would be even better with a turntable...

 

[Blizzard]

I think the real problem on this thread is, nobody participating has ever heard the best digital before.

 

[DaveC]

Perhaps I am making the claim that the distortions or process of LP enhances the sound in a pleasant way, and there is no evidence that there is any distortions in digitial that are the same type as in LP playback, thus, one can not conclude that digital has worse or unknown distortions, only it does not have the same as LP, which is indeed measureable.

I can conclude that through my own experience. I am still open to the possibility I am wrong, but those are my observations...

 

[DaveC]

I think the real problem on this thread is, nobody participating has ever heard the best digital before.

DSD does not seem to have the same problems as PCM, I'd like to hear what's possible with the best DSD implementation today... you gotta make your chipless DSD DAC available I guess...

 

[Blizzard]

DSD does not seem to have the same problems as PCM, I'd like to hear what's possible with the best DSD implementation today... you gotta make your chipless DSD DAC available I guess...

Nobody on this thread has heard a pure DSD DAC that actually measures great, yet still sounds as smooth as silk. It's 2016 now, so if these guys are using 2015 and prior technology as a digital reference, they shouldn't even be participating in this discussion.

 

[amirm]

I am making those claims as are many others. Digital has distortions that are not defined and much more harmful vs easily measurable analog distortions.

And as much as you claim this is unreasonable and unscientific, I am making the same claims about your unwillingness to consider often reported subjective observation as hypothesis.

I am not unwilling. I can actually explain your preferences for analog. But you are unwilling to accept that as the explanation even though it is the most logical and provable thing: i.e. there is coloration that you like. We can demonstrate this both objectively and subjectively. You can't ask me to put this aside and hang my hat on something you can't identify or quantify.

Put another way, it is not the end result that is in dispute. That is, the preference for analog recordings. It is the explanation that people attach to it which can't be defended using logic we use elsewhere in our everyday life.

 

[treitz3]

Blizzard, that's a little presumptuous (and insulting BTW) to say that nobody on this forum basically has or has heard what you have. What you have to say my be your opinion but it is just that.....YOUR opinion. Please stop shoving down people's throats. It's a big turnoff, truth be told.

Tom

 

[DaveC]

Nobody on this thread has heard a pure DSD DAC that actually measures great, yet still sounds as smooth as silk. It's 2016 now, so if these guys are using 2015 and prior technology as a digital reference, they shouldn't even be participating in this discussion.

Well, right now dcs and msb (and trinity, according to MikeL, which I have not experienced) are it. I'm open to the possibility your chipless dsd dac could be better but that has yet to be proven. I'd love to try it, but if the only format you are planning on selling it in is a one-box thing then you're really limiting how many folks will be interested.

 

[DaveC]

I am not unwilling. I can actually explain your preferences for analog. But you are unwilling to accept that as the explanation even though it is the most logical and provable thing: i.e. there is coloration that you like. We can demonstrate this both objectively and subjectively. You can't ask me to put this aside and hang my hat on something you can't identify or quantify.

Put another way, it is not the end result that is in dispute. That is, the preference for analog recordings. It is the explanation that people attach to it which can't be defended using logic we use elsewhere in our everyday life.

Wait a minute.. don't put words in my mouth. I never said that or even implied it. I am fully aware of euphonic colorations/distortions analog provides and accept that is part of the reason I like analog, but part of it is a lack of "PCM nasties", that's what we've been talking about as far as I can tell...