My reference for most accurate is hinged on the best direct to disc pressings which truly proves to be the closest to live sound medium currently available.
"Do Vinyl Records Actually Sound Better Than CDs? We Take A Closer Look" in Slashgear
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
My reference for most accurate is hinged on the best direct to disc pressings which truly proves to be the closest to live sound medium currently available.
Direct to disc doesn’t obviate the inherent distortions associated with vinyl playback.
You need to be exposed to proper vinyl playback which negates these so-called inherent distortions to neglegible levels.
All forms of digital have a great deal more distortion and nonlinearities than is inherent in a good vinyl pressing.
Carlos, could you tell us about your three high end turntable setups? I am curious about your vinyl playback choices and why you chose those over others. Thank you.
Is this not yet another case where the measurable performance potential of a system is confused with the actual auditory result?
In other words, the article inspires yet another intellectual excercise where some people say, digital must be better because it can outperform analogue in certain key parametres and is therefore less distorted than analogue, while other people respond by saying "analogue sound more natural, real..." etc
In the latter case, people refer to playback whereas in the former they refer to theoretical potential. Like a Ferrari stuck in traffic; it's potential is 0-100 in 3.3 sec, but right now it's moving at 30km/hr -- just like the (analogue) Fiat next to it.
I.e.what good is the higher dynamics resolution potential of digital if the file it is processing contains a mind-blowing 6 dB dynamic range? Any 50 year old, battery-powered, portable Philips record player can resolve that - no problem! Or even the rare 16 dB range? Peanuts to both digital and analogue systems alike (and, btw, don't some Allaerts cartridges have +50 dB resolution potential - I could be wrong).
I think it would be interesting to research why many people spontaneously appreciate the sound of analogue playback.
Because if precision were the yardstick, any digital playback would be perceived superior to every analogue playback. Regardless of whether the actual recording is digital or analogue...
Maybe the problem is in the medium we are playng, i.e. the recording and/ or the mastering as someone said before (@bonzo75 I think)
In other words, the article inspires yet another intellectual excercise where some people say, digital must be better because it can outperform analogue in certain key parametres and is therefore less distorted than analogue, while other people respond by saying "analogue sound more natural, real..." etc
In the latter case, people refer to playback whereas in the former they refer to theoretical potential. Like a Ferrari stuck in traffic; it's potential is 0-100 in 3.3 sec, but right now it's moving at 30km/hr -- just like the (analogue) Fiat next to it.
I.e.what good is the higher dynamics resolution potential of digital if the file it is processing contains a mind-blowing 6 dB dynamic range? Any 50 year old, battery-powered, portable Philips record player can resolve that - no problem! Or even the rare 16 dB range? Peanuts to both digital and analogue systems alike (and, btw, don't some Allaerts cartridges have +50 dB resolution potential - I could be wrong).
I think it would be interesting to research why many people spontaneously appreciate the sound of analogue playback.
Because if precision were the yardstick, any digital playback would be perceived superior to every analogue playback. Regardless of whether the actual recording is digital or analogue...
Maybe the problem is in the medium we are playng, i.e. the recording and/ or the mastering as someone said before (@bonzo75 I think)
The sound quality of the recordings is ultimately the dominant factor in playback sound quality. But this again does not obscure the inherent flaws in the different playback mechanisms.
Hi Carlos,
There are a variety of possible objectives of high-end audio. You have selected "accuracy" as your high-end audio objective.
In my objectives list "accuracy" translates closely to Objective 2) "reproduce exactly what is on the tape, vinyl or digital source being played."
Do you concede that your philosophy, approach and implementation make sense only if one's objective is "accuracy"?
"Accuracy" is not my personal high-end audio objective. So accuracy as defined by you is irrelevant to me.
Actually, accuracy doesn’t apply to my approach either as my goal is to do a better job of reproducing the music than what the original mastering engineer set forth. I’m not trying to imitate the original, I’m trying to improve upon the original to better match my taste and to highlight those sound qualities that are important to my ears.
Hmmm. This description of your approach seems to me not to characterize accurately your posts focused on various formulations of accuracy.
Of course this is not a problem, because the objectives of high-end are not mutually exclusive, and one may target and blend multiple objectives.
Exactly as you have been explaining all along. Your goal is enhance to taste. Your black box adds flavor. I always thought Ron's list of audiophile goals was incomplete.
I wonder does it ever occur to those Cd/digital advocates why almost all praised music was released before the Cd era. Do they ever consider recording medium and format (analog or digital) has a role on released music’s acceptance and emotional engagement by the consumer besides many other things?
Last edited:
When you take a peek outside the small world of audiophiles, format is largely irrelevant, and that is true regardless of music genres and eras.
In the realm of jazz, which I am most familiar with, collectors and critics generally own both digital and analog. "Audiophile" re-issues generally don't generate much excitement in that crowd.
That is a good way to put it.
Someone who desires 'accurate playback' can achieve their goal without listening.
I'm less familiar with jazz collecting, but I had the impression that jazz heads were quite hotted up over all the BlueNote reissues.
Do Vinyl Records Actually Sound Better Than CDs? We Take A Closer Look - SlashGear
Whether you prefer collecting vinyl or collecting CDs, the narrative has always been that vinyl sounds better. How true is this? SlashGear investigates.www.slashgear.com
Even to a CD only audiophile, that article was laughable! I love digital's superior dynamic range, but what use is it when the recording industry only uses about 3db of it.
The bit about vinyl records killing people had me in stitches. I am wearing a mask the next time I go to a friends house to listen to records.
I am sure some are. There is some interest in "better sound" but usually in cases where the currently available releases are notoriously poor. The gold standard is Mosaic Records, which is praised for its content, artwork, and liner notes.
You could of course argue that the "non audiophile" crowd is entirely missing out on "good sound", since they don't generally have the equipment required to get the best sound.
In an interview with the late jazz critic/collector Jan Evensmo, I asked him about his "gear", and here was his answer:
"My audio equipment is very modest, just an amplifier, CD-player, turntable (with all speeds) and cassette player, all old stuff. Had to give up the reel player. And a pc connected to play all the music files I receive, plus spotify. I have never been very interested in sound as such. I noticed that people with expensive equipment always had very few records to play!!"
He was probably being a little provocative. I consider myself a "passionate novice" when it comes to music - but I do follow what others have to say (both inside and outside audiophile communities), hence my comments.
Emotional engagement is a tricky topic. I think every audiophile will admit that they can be emotionally involved with even very basic gear. Once you pay attention to "sound" and get into high-end audio, you could argue that emotional involvement is increased with better sound, or you could also argue that the focus on sound is a barrier to emotional involvement, so that you end up emotionally engaged "in spite" of our (imperfect) systems. I don't hold the answers to all this.
Last edited:
Vinyl records’ revival threatens environment and health
Demand for vinyl records is soaring, but there’s something funky about this musical comeback – the energy and chemicals involved with producing the iconic circular discs creates pollution, adds to the climate crisis and may harm our health.
Similar threads
Members online
- TonyW
- roundhead
- hopkins
- Thundersnow
- pcosta
- tapepath
- Davidny
- fizzletop
- kadiddle
- Sound Dragon
- engadin
- octaviars
- Ackcheng
- dminches
- olivier
- ationg
- Salectric
- GSOphile
- Foxbat
- jazzdude99
- mtemur
- andromedaaudio
- GHasley
- hols
- matthias
- zerostargeneral
- nonesup
- MusicFellow
- golfball1987
- rad
- Georgios
- audiobomber
- an.vamv
- Rensselaer
- MOTU
- John T
- IvPa77
- vjayh
- ecwl
- MarkusBarkus
- rafale
- Supermario
- Joe Whip
- Danielaruso
- cat6man
- Juiced
- QuantumWave
- DW101
- Bjorn
- GJcoffeeman
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |