Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[PeterA]

Grain, in visual as well as audio arts, obfuscates…. If some think grain is detail, it explains a lot about why hobbyists argue.

I am a little bit unclear about what people mean when they use the term “grain“. I understand “texture”. Texture becomes apparent when resolution increases, and it contributes to the perception of natural timbre of various instruments.

Can someone briefly describe what “grain” means? It seems to be used in a negative sense.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I am a little bit unclear about what people mean when they use the term “grain“. I understand “texture”. Texture becomes apparent when resolution increases, and it contributes to the perception of natural timbre of various instruments.

Can someone briefly describe what “grain” means? It seems to be used in a negative sense.

texture and timbre are musical and vary with the music. completeness. grain is a screen door ultra detail kinda thing. sounds like micro-detail in some contexts, but it's a sameness. like a filter. maybe grain is actually comes from missing information that then makes other information more prominent. that's just a guess, but some heavy piece count circuits somewhat strangle the music and so remove an element of continuousness. bad digital can do that too.

not claiming i'm technically correct....just how it sounds to me when i hear it. of course, there are degrees of grain, like anything.

 

[Another Johnson]

When I use the term grain, I’m hearing a roughness or harshness to the edges of the particular sound. Homogeneous discontinuity. It might help some tease out definition, giving what they might consider more detail.

 

[PeterA]

A grain of sand is an irritant but it becomes a pearl in an oyster. A trumpet blast is rough at the leading edges but that’s the way a trumpet can sound. Sometimes instruments sound rough and raw. Grain must be something different. I find language difficult in this hobby.

 

[Another Johnson]

A grain of sand is an irritant but it becomes a pearl in an oyster. A trumpet blast is rough at the leading edges but that’s the way a trumpet can sound. Sometimes instruments sound rough and raw. Grain must be something different. I find language difficult in this hobby.

I can’t speak for others, but I would not confuse a trumpeter’s attack with residual overlayed roughness. But then I am less fixated on describing sound and more focused on enjoying music, so I may be an unreliable source for vocabulary.

HP and JGH both thought that common language is important for those who wish to discuss how they hear musical sounds. So you’re in good company.

 

[Rexp]

A grain of sand is an irritant but it becomes a pearl in an oyster. A trumpet blast is rough at the leading edges but that’s the way a trumpet can sound. Sometimes instruments sound rough and raw. Grain must be something different. I find language difficult in this hobby.

Yes I wouldn't use grain as a descriptor for harsh (painful to the ears) sound. Grain is best used in a visual context IMO.

 

[Another Johnson]

Yes I wouldn't use grain as a descriptor for harsh (painful to the ears) sound. Grain is best used in a visual context IMO.

See, we have problems even with non-audio language. I would not use harsh and painful as equivalent in my dialect.

And seriously, I do not want to be engaged in a conversation about descriptive audio language.

My internet is down at the mo’, so I’m going to go spin some records.

 

[Rexp]

My own experience with digital is that lower "distortion" translates into a blacker background, better resolution and instrument definition and placement.

Overall, I find that my digital system now provides for a very detailed yet relaxed sound. This was not always the case. Can it improve further? Who knows... I have heard a lot of digital sources/DACs and nothing out there has blown my mind, so at this point, I rather spend money on speakers.

How does it compare with analog? My turntable is not "high end" and is connected to my DAC through an ADC, so some will say that I am not getting the best out of an analog source.

However, many people (not necessarily audiophiles) do play LPs through their DACs, and appreciate the sound. Are they all deluded?

We also know that the quality of a well recorded LP can shine through a good vinyl rip.

I don't believe that a good quality ADC "kills" the sound of vinyl.

My phono preamp/ADC is the M2Tech Joplin. One aspect I find interesting is that the RIAA equalization is done through DSP and not in the analog domain. However good a phono preamp may be, there is always loss/distortion involved with analog signal treatment. So there are probably pros and cons to each solution. I have not found many other units that work like the Joplin.

A better quality turntable would certainly bring me further improvements, but is not worth the investment considering I play mostly digital.

Long story short: for those who have a digital only system and want to dabble in vinyl, a good phono/ADC can be a very good starting point (and perhaps sufficient).

Interesting review of the Joplin here, he says it's not a great phono stage but is an excellent ADC at 24/96 that makes his vinyl rips indistinguishable from his vinyl playback.

M2Tech Joplin Analog-To-Digital Converter An amazing 384kHz/32-bit ADC designed for modern audiophiles. Review By Tom Lyle

M2Tech Joplin Analog-To-Digital Converter An amazing 384kHz/32-bit ADC designed for modern audiophiles. Review By Tom Lyle of Enjoy the Music.com

www.enjoythemusic.com

 

[adrianywu]

A grain of sand is an irritant but it becomes a pearl in an oyster. A trumpet blast is rough at the leading edges but that’s the way a trumpet can sound. Sometimes instruments sound rough and raw. Grain must be something different. I find language difficult in this hobby.

Indeed, every time my wife heard the brass section on an orchestral recording, she comments that my system sounds "grainy" or "rough". I guess she has never heard a French horn up close in real life.

 

[Rexp]

Indeed, every time my wife heard the brass section on an orchestral recording, she comments that my system sounds "grainy" or "rough". I guess she has never heard a French horn up close in real life.

Maybe you should take her to a concert, bet she wouldn't regard the brass section as being rough or unpleasant.

 

[adrianywu]

Maybe you should take her to a concert, bet she wouldn't regard the brass section as being rough or unpleasant.

Plenty of concerts, but sitting far back, the sound is smoothed out.

 

[Rexp]

Here's a nice digital recording, the kind of sound I'm looking for but rarely find in commercial digital releases:

 

[hopkins]

Here's a nice digital recording, the kind of sound I'm looking for but rarely find in commercial digital releases:

Whatever it is that you appreciate here, it all has to do with the recording process (microphones etc...) not with the fact that the end result is available in a "digital" or "analog" format.

But don't you think this search for a particular sound is going to put considerable restrictions on the music you listen to?

 

[Rexp]

Whatever it is that you appreciate here, it all has to do with the recording process (microphones etc...) not with the fact that the end result is available in a "digital" or "analog" format.

But don't you think this search for a particular sound is going to put considerable restrictions on the music you listen to?

Can you explain how your reply relates to what I wrote?

 

[Ron Resnick]

it all has to do with the recording process (microphones etc...) not with the fact that the end result is available in a "digital" or "analog" format.

Do you think the believability and naturalness in terms of sound quality of the human voice is ever improved by converting it to digital?

 

[Cellcbern]

FYI: https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/review-audio-gd-r-7he-mk2-dac-lps-are-now-optional.1170610/

 

[hopkins]

Can you explain how your reply relates to what I wrote?

"Here's a nice digital recording, the kind of sound I'm looking for but rarely find in commercial digital releases"

 

[hopkins]

Do you think the believability and naturalness in terms of sound quality of the human voice is ever improved by converting it to digital?

I have no idea! I don't ask myself these types of question

 

[Audiohertz2]

Indeed, every time my wife heard the brass section on an orchestral recording, she comments that my system sounds "grainy" or "rough". I guess she has never heard a French horn up close in real life.

Recordings of live music is not live music not even close really...


Regards

 

[Another Johnson]

Do you think the believability and naturalness in terms of sound quality of the human voice is ever improved by converting it to digital?

I wonder if one shouldn’t step back and evaluate this idea that somehow ANY recording technology is meant to increase believability and naturalness of what is a totally believable and natural source. I think the goal of the recording process is to render the captured event on tape to be as close as possible to the live event. Neither analog nor digital capture has the goal of enhancing believability or natureness. Mastering is a different subject.

I would ask “Do you think the believability and naturalness in terms of sound quality of the human voice is ever improved by ANY RECORDING SYSTEM?”