Paul McGowan Prefers Digital

[Lee]

Interestingly Paul McGowan has further sharpened his view that one builds a system specifically for vinyl or specifically for digital, writing today that: “Every component in our system was chosen based on our source preference: digital or vinyl.”


Source specific

Every component in our system was chosen based on our source preference: digital or vinyl. If we’re assembling a vinyl system then everything that follows is judged on how good music tracked with a needle sounds. Or, if digital, how a CD sounds.
We’ve covered this ground before but it is ground worth revisiting.
When building a system my advice is to choose your loudspeakers first and to invest the greatest amount of money in them. Everything else follows from there. But that isn’t quite the same as my opening statement of tuning to the source. Or is it? When you evaluate those new speakers it will likely be based on the source you’re most comfortable with.
We don’t always think about our selection process in terms of source material. Few think of the process as building a vinyl-based system, or a digital one. Instead, we tell ourselves we’re building a music systemand we just prefer one source to another. The reality is that the source mediums are so different they wind up dictating just about every decision in the chain: speakers, amplifiers, preamps, wires, room conditioning, positioning, voicing. All tuned to our source material.
Which is why you can’t judge source technology by simply plopping it into a system pre-tuned for the opposite. Dropping the finest digital source equipment into a vinyl-based setup won’t work. You will always prefer the original.
It may not be possible to have a system that’s optimized for both so let’s not make sweeping proclamations about which is better, digital or analog.
All we can legitimately say is what we prefer in our optimized system.

https://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/source-specific/

Do you think this is correct?

I feel this goes too far. I personally select the loudspeaker first, but I believe I do this without thinking about source media. Next I select the amplifier to drive properly the speaker; I am not thinking about the source media to figure out what amp goes with the speaker.

While I remain a huge fan of Paul and PS Audio in general, this is indeed going too far. Well said.

 

[sbo6]

Interestingly Paul McGowan has further sharpened his view that one builds a system specifically for vinyl or specifically for digital, writing today that: “Every component in our system was chosen based on our source preference: digital or vinyl.”


Source specific

Every component in our system was chosen based on our source preference: digital or vinyl. If we’re assembling a vinyl system then everything that follows is judged on how good music tracked with a needle sounds. Or, if digital, how a CD sounds.
We’ve covered this ground before but it is ground worth revisiting.
When building a system my advice is to choose your loudspeakers first and to invest the greatest amount of money in them. Everything else follows from there. But that isn’t quite the same as my opening statement of tuning to the source. Or is it? When you evaluate those new speakers it will likely be based on the source you’re most comfortable with.
We don’t always think about our selection process in terms of source material. Few think of the process as building a vinyl-based system, or a digital one. Instead, we tell ourselves we’re building a music systemand we just prefer one source to another. The reality is that the source mediums are so different they wind up dictating just about every decision in the chain: speakers, amplifiers, preamps, wires, room conditioning, positioning, voicing. All tuned to our source material.
Which is why you can’t judge source technology by simply plopping it into a system pre-tuned for the opposite. Dropping the finest digital source equipment into a vinyl-based setup won’t work. You will always prefer the original.
It may not be possible to have a system that’s optimized for both so let’s not make sweeping proclamations about which is better, digital or analog.
All we can legitimately say is what we prefer in our optimized system.

https://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/source-specific/

Do you think this is correct?

I feel this goes too far. I personally select the loudspeaker first, but I believe I do this without thinking about source media. Next I select the amplifier to drive properly the speaker; I am not thinking about the source media to figure out what amp goes with the speaker.

I agree with you, not Paul. Ideally I pick the speaker and then the amp required to adequately and best sonically drive them. I think most audiophiles swap components including the source(s), amp(s), cables and preamp in an attempt to get the best synergy / sound to their liking - it's a continued balancing process. I also think if your system is tuned to your liking any source will sound excellent but again, may require further tuning.

 

[Tango]

Bob,

wow. not sure what prompted this. that's a lot to live up to. i'm humbled by such words, but thank you for that. i just do what is fun for me to do.

while i do take the pursuit of the hobby seriously, i try not to take myself too seriously......and not act defensively. as Bruce mentions, as we get older we learn to avoid battles, or at least choose them wisely.

again, thanks. and agree we are fortunate there are many others who have a similar approach. i think we all reflect each other's good will back around.

AAAre you blushing? Maybe a little bit Mike?

Tang

 

[Mike Lavigne]

AAAre you blushing? Maybe a little bit Mike?

Tang

not sure what i'm doing. out of my comfort zone for sure. uncomfortable. but it's ok and we move on. not sure the right smiley to use.

 

[marty]

So the question for me becomes understanding what nourishes you as an audiophile and a music lover and that every person’s different approach in these has validity for them.

So you can get a buzz from the act of owning physical media makes complete sense to me but this is not the only nourishment that can be had out of the process.

For some of us the amazing journey that discovering an almost boundless journey to the near infinite sea of possibilities when say you just simply type in the words Shostakovich Cello Concerto No. 1 and this wealth of passion and musical commitment from the various peaks on the mountain range appear... Rostropovich, Mravinsky, Kondrashin... there is an ocean of greatness there to dive into...

So you realise that you had forgotten about the Emmanuel Bertrand performance and so dive again into savour those four extraordinary opening notes penned by Dmitri Shostakovich and relive all the invention and genius, and share in the emotional tension of a life lived in repression and struggle with the demons without and his demons within. This is not a bloodless journey Marc. The music is also the blood.

So whatever nourishes us in this journey is deeply valid for each of us. There are things to savour in the rituals, in our overcoming the technical and mechanical struggles, to answering the maze of puzzles in the many great pathways to refinement, to approach the very mountain and the ocean of the musicians and the music and us... who we are, what we feel, how we connect.

I never make light of anyone else’s journey because these are not silly outcomes, these are rich, and valuable and culturally extraordinary riches, in the experience of music there is a potential connection to the most sacred of elements in life, who people are, how they express their life’s journey, what they discover along the way.

This all can be found via the humble shiny silver disc, or the black gold of alchemy within vinyl, on the boundless world wide inter web or just with some simple ear buds and YouTube... when I backpacked across Europe in the 80’s I left my IMF RSPM IVs transmission lines and SOTA sapphire behind and bought a Sony Walkman and spent a year going to the great music halls of the old world, engaging in music with ear buds and live, going to jazz clubs and raves, partying at night, enjoying music in the villages in the day and in the great cities in the evening and via earbuds on the scenic train journeys and I left the relative safety of my sound system and let go of the known.

Music is a core theme and how you get there is just up to you. When you get there via any path you realise that there is nothing bloodless about any of these journeys at all if they actually lead you to what truly nourishes you. Look without and look within and focus on what works for you and if you choose let go of your current safe places and happy journey, take on streaming as well and enjoy and if not it fine, but it just doesn’t mean that it’s in any way less valid than any other of your chosen paths but rather just not for you now. If you can’t enjoy it then no loss as you already enjoy what you have. But there is no need to question the validity of this way for others. Because I am not on your pathway does not mean that I am lost. Each and every journey is potentially absolutely as deep and meaningful and completely valid as any. No body really has to justify to anyone else why their life experiences have value and meaning and so how their experiences could in any way be some way less essential or somehow bloodless just because you have yet to uncover the essence contained within doesn’t really hold water... or indeed blood.

The blood for me is in the music and the musician and my experience of them, the way I connect is not necessarily the central point of my journey.

+1 Very well done! Lot's of pearls in here. Read, and then read again.

 

[RogerD]

For all of the Tom Petty fans. Here is a interesting comment from Robert Fine’s son Tom Fine. Tom is a well known RE. Both his Father and his mother Wilma Cosart Fine are famous for the Mercury records recordings they made.
This was posted on the Ampex List today. I thought Tom’s observations on the digital download are relevant as the digital captures the “analog” sound quite well in Tom’s opinion.
I’m not saying digital is better here, but as a format it can be excellent....

I highly recommend the high-resolution downloads of the new Tom Petty greatest hit anthology "The Best of Everything." This is an example of how older-school rock should sound. Kudos to the remastering team for being loyal to the sound and dynamics of the original recordings, rather than trying to make everything sound like a modern-day pop album (ie totally crunched, bright and LOUD). By letting the original masters' dynamics speak for themselves, we hear air and space around the different instruments and voices, and drums sound like drums. This is true even with Petty's all-digital material in the collection. He wasn't a loudness warrior, and apparently his drummer did NOT lose all the arguments with the guitarists. I don't know if the 2CD version also avoids loudness-warring.​

Ampex content -- Petty's prime-era and 80s albums were made using Ampex machines and some were mastered on Ampex tape.​

-- Tom Fine​

 

[PeterA]

Interestingly Paul McGowan has further sharpened his view that one builds a system specifically for vinyl or specifically for digital, writing today that: “Every component in our system was chosen based on our source preference: digital or vinyl.”

...

Do you think this is correct?

I feel this goes too far. I personally select the loudspeaker first, but I believe I do this without thinking about source media. Next I select the amplifier to drive properly the speaker; I am not thinking about the source media to figure out what amp goes with the speaker.

I wonder what dealers would have to say about this. The big room at Goodwins High End has top tier vinyl and digital. I never heard the employees tell me that the non-source components in the room were selected on the basis of the source format. But then I never asked, because it never occured to me.

What do Alex and Eliot think?

I wonder if Paul thinks this is because of some sonic difference between the formats or because of some electrical or signal requirements? I wish he would expand and explain why he thinks this, and why he seems to be a rare voice with this opinion.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Peter, I think Paul's view is as preposterous as the view thats it's perplexing Paul could prefer digital.

In fact, the only view that's not preposterous or perplexing on this matter is mine LOL.

IMHO, of course.

Ron, are you spending that extra hour a day constructively?

 

[Ron Resnick]

. . . I think Paul's view is as preposterous as the view thats it's perplexing Paul could prefer digital.

. . . Ron, are you spending that extra hour a day constructively?

I am trying to, but it is difficult when you post confused things like your first sentence for me to untangle.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Well, it's a prerequisite to enlightenment to be confused to start. I'm sure my mum told me to get my brain together as I got older.

Ron, my advice to use that hour constructively. Get that MF cdp of yours into daily operation, and buy a few cds to listen to for 60mins every day. Challenge yourself.

 

[RogerD]

Interestingly Paul McGowan has further sharpened his view that one builds a system specifically for vinyl or specifically for digital, writing today that: “Every component in our system was chosen based on our source preference: digital or vinyl.”


Source specific

Every component in our system was chosen based on our source preference: digital or vinyl. If we’re assembling a vinyl system then everything that follows is judged on how good music tracked with a needle sounds. Or, if digital, how a CD sounds.
We’ve covered this ground before but it is ground worth revisiting.
When building a system my advice is to choose your loudspeakers first and to invest the greatest amount of money in them. Everything else follows from there. But that isn’t quite the same as my opening statement of tuning to the source. Or is it? When you evaluate those new speakers it will likely be based on the source you’re most comfortable with.
We don’t always think about our selection process in terms of source material. Few think of the process as building a vinyl-based system, or a digital one. Instead, we tell ourselves we’re building a music systemand we just prefer one source to another. The reality is that the source mediums are so different they wind up dictating just about every decision in the chain: speakers, amplifiers, preamps, wires, room conditioning, positioning, voicing. All tuned to our source material.
Which is why you can’t judge source technology by simply plopping it into a system pre-tuned for the opposite. Dropping the finest digital source equipment into a vinyl-based setup won’t work. You will always prefer the original.
It may not be possible to have a system that’s optimized for both so let’s not make sweeping proclamations about which is better, digital or analog.
All we can legitimately say is what we prefer in our optimized system.

https://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/source-specific/

Do you think this is correct?

I feel this goes too far. I personally select the loudspeaker first, but I believe I do this without thinking about source media. Next I select the amplifier to drive properly the speaker; I am not thinking about the source media to figure out what amp goes with the speaker.

Yep, knowing a few design audio engineers, perfectly logical. If his digital is at the summit, It can be very vivid, so maybe the speaker design would be a consideration and amplifiers. Cables too.

 

[PeterA]

Yep, knowing a few design audio engineers, perfectly logical. If his digital is at the summit, It can be very vivid, so maybe the speaker design would be a consideration and amplifiers. Cables too.

I follow this, but is he not suggesting that all systems should be designed around either the digital or analog source, and not just those systems which have digital sources that are at the summit?

 

[RogerD]

nsideration

I follow this, but is he not suggesting that all systems should be designed around either the digital or analog source, and not just those systems which have digital sources that are at the summit?

If you are right then it fit’s for “all” analog or digital systems. Wouldn’t make sense for those two-fer systems.
Myself...I really don’t see doing Peter’s customization....Hell I can change the sound from vivid to less so just by adjusting my speakers (though there’s only one right way). A road to the asylum is paved with good and bad...it’s hard enough.

 

[dctom]

In my experience music produced in the analogue domain sounds better on vinyl, a CD transfer is usually inferior. My old Blue Note, Pablo LPs are preferable to to the CD versions , the few Hi-rez versions available to me fair better. However some digital versions of analogue recordings I have sound as good as the analogue and others which are very close.

The way a recording has been produced, digital or analogue, has a huge bearing on the final output and to whether one format is preferable to the other .

There seems to be no hard and fast rule comparing vinyl to digital in my system - as to which is going to sound" better" - how the music was produced/transferred/mastered etc in the first place will dictate that. Modern Hi-res classical recordings can sound superb, even redbook - again it is down to the recording/production. A well recorded/pressed record (standard 33 1/3rpm) will probably outperform a well produced digital version on my system but it is not a given.

Stating the obvious, we are very much at the mercy of the quality of the material available to play on our systems.

I have an excellent vinyl playback set up and used to always prefer it to CD and streaming, wearing out many cartridges in the process. I will happily listen my DAC playing for an extended period. CDs which sounded unpleasant in the past are now listenable after ripping, I don't get any of the digital artifacts or hardness that was the bane of binary play back previously and of course there is a massive quantity of newer music not available on vinyl.

My collection of LPs is ITRO 2K - I guess if I had a vast collection of super quality vinyl, such as Ked describes when visiting the General,then I might be exclusively analogue! However needs must, acquiring digital music is more economical than vinyl in these days of retirement.

I have managed to compare the Yarlung Janaki String Trio LP(Mike mentioned) with the 4 x dsd version.They both produce excellent sonics. The vinyl does outshine the dsd, the cello sounds slightly more woody, the bite of the bow suggesting a greater sense of friction. Overall the vinyl is more expansive giving clearer spatial clues. But of course this is a well recorded and pressed 45 album - not a bog standard pressing. If all vinyl sounded like this on my system then I would listen to digital much less.

However I am now in a position to enjoy listening to either format equally.

 

[Al M.]

I really think you should figure out a way to audition leisurely and carefully in your own system an MSB DAC. I suspect it would result in you viewing the DACs you are familiar with in a different sonic light.

The MSB DACs have allowed me to enjoy listening to digital. They were a big and unexpected revelation to me.

I have been thinking about it. I am in need of an active gain preamp to replace my buffered no-gain Pass B1 preamp. If the volume control in the MSB Premier would function well instead of a separate preamp, then I would have auditioned the DAC already. Yet as KeithR communicated to me in helpful exchanges, alas the volume control in the MSB Premier is no substitute for a quality preamp. Currently I am auditioning preamps. At this point I don't have the budget for both a great preamp and an MSB Premier DAC, the one I would be most interested in.

My new Denafrips Terminator DAC is substantially better than the Schiit Yggdrasil it replaces. How the Denafrips Terminator would stack up against an MSB, even just an MSB Discrete, none of us knows, since none of us has heard them side by side.

 

[spiritofmusic]

So Al, Schiit is old Schiit now? Congrats on the new acquisition
Terminator remains on a very short shortlist for my move into streaming.

 

[Al M.]

So Al, Schiit is old Schiit now? Congrats on the new acquisition
Terminator remains on a very short shortlist for my move into streaming.

Thanks, Marc. The Schiit is still a good DAC, but the Terminator is substantially better. It will play more into what you want in terms of tonality and tonal richness.

I'll write up something soon.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Hey, two good boxes ticked. A recent enthusiastic review says it combines the hard to attain attributes of density and natural detail retrieval.

 

[KeithR]

I have been thinking about it. I am in need of an active gain preamp to replace my buffered no-gain Pass B1 preamp. If the volume control in the MSB Premier would function well instead of a separate preamp, then I would have auditioned the DAC already. Yet as KeithR communicated to me in helpful exchanges, alas the volume control in the MSB Premier is no substitute for a quality preamp. Currently I am auditioning preamps. At this point I don't have the budget for both a great preamp and an MSB Premier DAC, the one I would be most interested in.

I think a TVC with Discrete dac is all you need.

 

[Al M.]

Hey, two good boxes ticked. A recent enthusiastic review says it combines the hard to attain attributes of density and natural detail retrieval.

The review is correct, in my view.