Done with digital

[Rekmeyata]

I am done with digital. After having suffered thru every digital format available over the years, and never liking the sound of any of it, I am putting all my time, money and effort into my analog front-ends (turntable and tapedeck).

How many of you have a similar story to tell?

The sad thing about digital is that they have the capability to reproduce sound very similar to analog, it was called DVD, and then later BluRay; but DVD alone would have done a great job, and initially when DVD came out they were going to replace the CD format and put music on DVD because the DVD held a lot more bits of information than a CD, a CD can only hold about 700 MB of data, but a DVD can hold 17 GB's of data. Tests were done that proved that music sound quality was far better on the DVD, but for some reason this never went anywhere. So, they put movies on it instead, which ate up the GB's data and left less space for music than a CD had!

Problem with records and tape is that they don't last, they wear out, and while CD's or DVD's can get scratched it takes a lot more effort to do so, and they never wear out.

 

[Al M.]

The sad thing about digital is that they have the capability to reproduce sound very similar to analog, it was called DVD, and then later BluRay; but DVD alone would have done a great job, and initially when DVD came out they were going to replace the CD format and put music on DVD because the DVD held a lot more bits of information than a CD, a CD can only hold about 700 MB of data, but a DVD can hold 17 GB's of data. Tests were done that proved that music sound quality was far better on the DVD, but for some reason this never went anywhere. So, they put movies on it instead, which ate up the GB's data and left less space for music than a CD had!

Problem with records and tape is that they don't last, they wear out, and while CD's or DVD's can get scratched it takes a lot more effort to do so, and they never wear out.

Or instead of bemoaning the allegedly inferior sound quality of CD, get a good CD transport, a competent reclocker to remove jitter, and a great DAC. Then you will hear just how much musical information there is on a CD -- a ton! Much more than we would have known a decade ago, much more. Great timbral believability, enormous amounts of timbral fine detail and of dynamic nuance, great separation and distinction of instruments, lots of spatial information on a recording (all that gets concealed and congealed in suboptimal streaming too, by the way). Those "just" 700 MB of data pack a punch. Well, as digital theory always said.

 

[rDin]

Well, as digital theory always said.

There's a well understood problem here, though: while the theory is proven, it's not currently possible to implement the reconstruction filter perfectly due to physical limitations on the electronics. So every DAC's reconstruction is a compromise and every DAC designer tries to compensate for the limitations of their reconstruction filter, some more successfully than others. This is also why we now have software solutions like PGGB, to try and resolve the problem. Analog formats bypass this problem entirely. It seems likely to me, that those who prefer the sound of vinyl/tape are perhaps more sensitive than those who don't to the issues caused by imperfect digital reconstruction of the analog sound wave...

 

[Ron Resnick]

It seems likely to me, that those who prefer the sound of vinyl/tape are perhaps more sensitive than those who don't to the issues caused by imperfect digital reconstruction of the analog sound wave...

I truly have always wondered if there was something like this going on. This reminds me of how some people experience discomfort from the rainbow effect of the color wheel of a DLP projector, and some people do not. And it's a totally random thing as to who and who does not experience the color wheel problem.

In this video context I believe it's totally accepted that the rainbow effect is a real thing, and it is a given that it bothers some people and it doesn't bother other people.

As good as digital as gotten, and my recent DAC survey experience proves to me that it has gotten very, very good, I still experience a very slight and subtle discomfort and fatigue with digital that I find hard to explain. I wonder if this theory explains it.

 

[Blue58]

I’m particularly sensitive to pops/clicks on vinyl which startle me and induce a flight/fight response. Perhaps my instinct for survival is heightened as the smell of burning freaks me out and I’m scared of falling too.

 

[rDin]

I’m particularly sensitive to pops/clicks on vinyl which startle me and induce a flight/fight response

It's a valid criticism, but also a convenient straw man when discussing the sound quality of vinyl.

 

[Cellcbern]

In my system my Modwright modified Marantz SA8005 SACD/CD player with custom analogue tube output stage and separate tube rectified power supply is so resolving and natural sounding that I've had no motivation to try streaming, servers, and other non-physical media playback sources. Don't see that changing any time soon. Well recorded SACD's leave me wanting for nothing, and well recorded CD's are very very good with this player. It does have a USB port on the front to which my wife plugs in her i-phone for party playlists. The sound quality this way is good enough for parties. The really good sounding non-physical media sources I've heard that match the sound quality of my sacd player have been multiples of its cost and double the box count. With almost every non-physical media front end I've listened to I've heard electronic artifacts that I don't hear with SACD's in my system. If I make another big investment it will be to add a high end turntable/cartridge/phono amp.

 

[Al M.]

There's a well understood problem here, though: while the theory is proven, it's not currently possible to implement the reconstruction filter perfectly due to physical limitations on the electronics. So every DAC's reconstruction is a compromise and every DAC designer tries to compensate for the limitations of their reconstruction filter, some more successfully than others. This is also why we now have software solutions like PGGB, to try and resolve the problem. Analog formats bypass this problem entirely. It seems likely to me, that those who prefer the sound of vinyl/tape are perhaps more sensitive than those who don't to the issues caused by imperfect digital reconstruction of the analog sound wave...

I didn't mean to imply that implementation of the theory has become perfect. It has not. But finally we are hearing something of the promise of CD, which had been so elusive to put into practice. The better practical implementation becomes, the more the theory appears to be vindicated on the level of audible result.

I am hearing a harmonic richness and reproduction of decay that I had not thought possible. Massed orchestral violins seemed such a problem for CD and I always thought vinyl would remain superior in that regard. Now, to my ears, the best recordings of string sections on CD are just astounding in their timbral believability and silky fine texture.

String quartet can also sound phenomenal in richness and fine detail of texture. Digital recordings in particular shine, e.g., the recent cycle of complete Beethoven string quartets by the young French Ebene Quartet, which delivers phenomenal interpretations and playing too.

 

[microstrip]

The sad thing about digital is that (...)

IMHO the sad thing about digital is that it is often misrepresented in some high-end audio forums.

 

[rDin]

I didn't mean to imply that implementation of the theory has become perfect. It has not. But finally we are hearing something of the promise of CD, which had been so elusive to put into practice. The better practical implementation becomes, the more the theory appears to be vindicated on the level of audible result.

Apologies if I inferred incorrectly. But, agreed. The theory is proven. Unfortunately, they didn't consider the practical application, and we have lived with the consequences since as we grapple with how best to implement digital within the physical limitations we have. However, the sampling and reconstruction of digital audio is unequivocally improving. And it seems likely to continue to do so. Also, our understanding of how the brain "hears" continues to improve and so it seems likely that as some stage we will surpass the brain's ability to distinguish be[tween] the recording and the original.

 

[Al M.]

Apologies if I inferred incorrectly. But, agreed. The theory is proven. Unfortunately, they didn't consider the practical application, and we have lived with the consequences since as we grapple with how best to implement digital within the physical limitations we have. However, the sampling and reconstruction of digital audio is unequivocally improving. And it seems likely to continue to do so.

The journey has been a pain indeed.

Also, our understanding of how the brain "hears" continues to improve and so it seems likely that as some stage we will surpass the brain's ability to distinguish be the recording and the original.

Not sure if I'd go that far .

 

[rDin]

Well, that's just a lack of imagination

 

[caesar]

It's a valid criticism, but also a convenient straw man when discussing the sound quality of vinyl.

I love vinyl. Especially well-done ripped vinyl, but we all focus on different things...

 

[caesar]

As good as digital as gotten, and my recent DAC survey experience proves to me that it has gotten very, very good, I still experience a very slight and subtle discomfort and fatigue with digital that I find hard to explain. I wonder if this theory explains it.

Have you tried vinyl ripped to digital? I enjoy digital, don't get me wrong, and experience what you are referring to primarily when I compare to vinyl ripped to digital of the same recording

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Have you tried vinyl ripped to digital? I enjoy digital, don't get me wrong, and experience what you are referring to primarily when I compare to vinyl ripped to digital of the same recording

prefer high quality tape transfers to vinyl rips.....and i like/love my vinyl rips.

i do agree that vinyl rips do insert some vinyl presentation character. like adding 'a bit of' cream to your coffee to varying degrees. they are not all exactly the same.

listening to 'real' vinyl you get a degree of 'suspension of disbelief' realism which balances the vinyl presentation aspect. with the vinyl rips that realism is reduced and the digital medium exposes the vinyl artifacts to some small degree.

the better your digital, the more these nuanced differences in source matter. so it's not an absolute at all. i could see lots of systems where the vinyl rips would be just what the doctor ordered.

 

[microstrip]

Apologies if I inferred incorrectly. But, agreed. The theory is proven. Unfortunately, they didn't consider the practical application, and we have lived with the consequences since as we grapple with how best to implement digital within the physical limitations we have. However, the sampling and reconstruction of digital audio is unequivocally improving. And it seems likely to continue to do so. Also, our understanding of how the brain "hears" continues to improve and so it seems likely that as some stage we will surpass the brain's ability to distinguish be the recording and the original.

I can't understand. People are still improving significantly their vinyl systems, new electronics for tape machines are being announced. And no one complains we have lived with inferior sound for decades ...

It is known that for trade reasons digital audio was presented and sold to consumers before it was a mature system, with plenty of marketing hype. But for almost three decades we have had great digital sound. Why always mourning the early days?

 

[microstrip]

prefer high quality tape transfers to vinyl rips.....and i like/love my vinyl rips.

i do agree that vinyl rips do insert some vinyl presentation character. like adding 'a bit of' cream to your coffee to varying degrees. they are not all exactly the same.

listening to 'real' vinyl you get a degree of 'suspension of disbelief' realism which balances the vinyl presentation aspect. with the vinyl rips that realism is reduced and the digital medium exposes the vinyl artifacts to some small degree.

the better your digital, the more these nuanced differences in source matter. so it's not an absolute at all. i could see lots of systems where the vinyl rips would be just what the doctor ordered.

Mike,

A direct question. Let us forget the "cream", focusing on the "coffee". Do you thing that your vinyl sound of twenty years ago was "better" than you current digital?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Have you tried vinyl ripped to digital? I enjoy digital, don't get me wrong, and experience what you are referring to primarily when I compare to vinyl ripped to digital of the same recording

I don't know what ripping means. It seems like a weird word to use in this context.

Do you mean playing a vinyl record and using an analog-to-digital converter to dub it to a hard drive?

No, this is not something I would do. It makes no sense to me. Even if MikeL is correct that this adds a bit of creaminess to the digital file I still wouldn't bother to do it --- it seems to me to combine the worst aspects of both formats.

 

[Joe Whip]

Exactly Ron. It works exceedingly well.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike,

A direct question. Let us forget the "cream", focusing on the "coffee". Do you thing that your vinyl sound of twenty years ago was "better" than you current digital?

yes; with my better pressings, no doubt at all.

i got my Rockport Sirius III 20 years ago. and had my vdH Colibri. i have clear memories of those times and it was awesome. epic even.

22 years ago i was using the Basis 2500 with the Graham arm and Koetsu RSP, which a case could be made that the Wadax is on that level on most pressings, but not all. then 21 years ago i upgraded to the Rockport Sirius II SE, which was a big jump up....but not near where the Sirius III went to.