Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

Is a Lampi Baltic 4 already seriously good or do you have to go ways further to get the quality right?
Lampi Baltic is way at the bottom of the Lampi chain. Lampi has many models above it. Since you are shopping for dacs you should head to Dac thread or for Lampi differences to a Lampi thread.

For Dac Vs server you can check what Taiko, Aurender, antipodes and innuos guys each think compared to the dacs and servers they changed.

This is a digital Vs vinyl thread so you are off topic
 
Lampi Baltic is way at the bottom of the Lampi chain. Lampi has many models above it. Since you are shopping for dacs you should head to Dac thread or for Lampi differences to a Lampi thread.

For Dac Vs server you can check what Taiko, Aurender, antipodes and innuos guys each think compared to the dacs and servers they changed.

This is a digital Vs vinyl thread so you are off topic
... well, the title is

Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?​

... so I would assume that this includes all components in a digital chain and the influence they have on the SQ in comparison?
 
... well, the title is

Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?​

... so I would assume that this includes all components in a digital chain and the influence they have on the SQ in comparison?
It will then start into a Lampi vs dCS vs wadax vs MSB etc and each model being compared, then what server, taiko, or a CD player, which one, and again exactly which TT, arm, cartridge, phono are you comparing it.

If you have a data point. that a sub 10k Baltic + auralic aries sounded better than your Dohmann II, please let us know.
 
It will then start into a Lampi vs dCS vs wadax vs MSB etc and each model being compared, then what server, taiko, or a CD player, which one, and again exactly which TT, arm, cartridge, phono are you comparing it.

If you have a data point. that a sub 10k Baltic + auralic aries sounded better than your Dohmann II, please let us know.
... not even close to the Döhmann - but the jump from Auralic to Antipodes was quite noticeable and made digital way more enjoyable ;-)... so I was wandering if upgrading the DAC will also be as big a step and in sum take things closer to vinyl in terms of enjoyability ... obviously digital will never be analog and vise versa... but I don`t get that discussion anyways... when vinyl exists and you have such great quality, whats the point in making digital be just like vinyl? When there`s vinyl available I buy vinyl and play vinyl, and that`s that. For me it`s a different source for music that is not available on vinyl and then it`s about making it as enjoyable as can be within a certain budget in it´s own right...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: heihei and bonzo75
There is little doubt that modern high resolution digital, esp. DSD, is technically superior to analogue, which has remained more or less static since the introduction of Dolby SR in the early 1990s. From a recording point of view, I would challenge anyone to distinguish a live mic feed from one encoded and decoded in real time with DSD. I have done this often, and cannot tell a difference. However, the process of recording the signal onto a storage medium and the retrieval can introduce some artifacts, depending on the equipment. These artifacts are miniscule when compared to those introduced during the mastering and production of vinyl records. The only argument I can see is whether analogue recordings, esp. those from the golden age of stereo between 1954 and the mid-1970s, are best served by staying analogue or digitized. I would say if properly done, they are best digitized for the majority of users. This means encoding with minimal manipulation into high rez DSD. Of the 400 or so transfers I have done so far from my master tapes, I would say pretty much all of them are superior to commercially available vinyl LPs, whether these are original releases or audiophile reissues. But I must also say that many commercial digital reissues of old recordings have not been done well. The redbook CD files should not even be considered nowadays, and even the high rez transfers were either upsampled from low resolution files, or done without much care, which is reflected in the end result. For new recordings, there is little point in the extra expense of using analogue tape, other than for commercial reasons. Unfortunately, few modern digital recordings are being made with the same care and technical expertise afforded the classic analogue recordings of the golden age. Oftentimes, the best recorded versions of certain pieces remain those made 60 years ago. And if no well transferred digital reissues of these recordings are available, vinyl remains the best option unless one has access to the master tapes. Of course, the original 4-track tapes of these recordings, if in good condition, will almost always be superior to the vinyl records, and often cost less than the new audiophile reissues, but this is a separate topic in itself.
Do you believe all PCM recordings are flawed?
 
There is little doubt that modern high resolution digital, esp. DSD, is technically superior to analogue, which has remained more or less static since the introduction of Dolby SR in the early 1990s. From a recording point of view, I would challenge anyone to distinguish a live mic feed from one encoded and decoded in real time with DSD. I have done this often, and cannot tell a difference. However, the process of recording the signal onto a storage medium and the retrieval can introduce some artifacts, depending on the equipment. These artifacts are miniscule when compared to those introduced during the mastering and production of vinyl records. The only argument I can see is whether analogue recordings, esp. those from the golden age of stereo between 1954 and the mid-1970s, are best served by staying analogue or digitized. I would say if properly done, they are best digitized for the majority of users. This means encoding with minimal manipulation into high rez DSD. Of the 400 or so transfers I have done so far from my master tapes, I would say pretty much all of them are superior to commercially available vinyl LPs, whether these are original releases or audiophile reissues. But I must also say that many commercial digital reissues of old recordings have not been done well. The redbook CD files should not even be considered nowadays, and even the high rez transfers were either upsampled from low resolution files, or done without much care, which is reflected in the end result. For new recordings, there is little point in the extra expense of using analogue tape, other than for commercial reasons. Unfortunately, few modern digital recordings are being made with the same care and technical expertise afforded the classic analogue recordings of the golden age. Oftentimes, the best recorded versions of certain pieces remain those made 60 years ago. And if no well transferred digital reissues of these recordings are available, vinyl remains the best option unless one has access to the master tapes. Of course, the original 4-track tapes of these recordings, if in good condition, will almost always be superior to the vinyl records, and often cost less than the new audiophile reissues, but this is a separate topic in itself.

Why do you and others continue to ignore the superior reference-setting performance of direct-to-disc pressings?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeterA
It did seem to degrade peoples ability to judge what sounds right and true, and what doesn't.
Although I have made an exception in this instance, your comment epitomizes the reason I no longer post on this forum. Life is not binary.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Rexp
Why do you and others continue to ignore the superior reference-setting performance of direct-to-disc pressings?
unfortunately; while direct to disc has a higher ceiling performance than vinyl, and rivals the best tape in some respects, it's intimidating effect on performance, and scarcity with top artists due to it's process requirements, push it into the margins. so it's never reached the heights it might have.

i have maybe 100 direct to disc pressings, and the one's with top level performers and performances are really great. among my top reference recordings. but many are 'meh' as music with limited musical value. just great sound. the better live digital recordings are more fun to listen to. it's all about the performance first and always.

i would be hopelessly bored very quickly if i limited myself to good direct to disc pressings, and give up the hobby as a serious endeavor. direct to disc is a nice niche of super sounding choices. 100 out of 12,000 pressings. with 30-40 or so great music too. tape sourced 45rpm reissues (i own approx 1500) are a much more legit target delivering lots more value and selection with great performances.....if not quite reaching the SQ heights of the finest direct to discs.

in the late 70's/early 80's, just when direct to disc was gaining a little steam, digital came along and grabbed the spotlight, just like in the mid 90's when the i-tunes and the i-pod and files (eventually streaming) grabbed the spotlight from multi-channel and pushed music production momentum back to 2 channel.

dollars and commercial concerns tend to rule the roost....unfortunately. follow the dollars.
 
Last edited:
Although I have made an exception in this instance, your comment epitomizes the reason I no longer post on this forum.

This is a pretty harsh response to what I have legitimately witnessed in those that have so eagerly drank the "redbook is perfectly reproduced reality" that they have been brainwashed with.
 
Do you think they had the talent to play a whole new album worth of material without screwing up in a single take?

If the focus is on note perfection and not musical magic we are lost.

Exactly the problem with most direct to disc pressings
 
Do you think they had the talent to play a whole new album worth of material without screwing up in a single take?

Alternate takes are sometimes fascinating to listen to, especially with jazz musicians as you can compare how they improvise on different takes. If you listen to them, you will also find out that all musicians do "screw up" once in a while!
 
...i would be hopelessly bored very quickly if i limited myself to good direct to disc pressings, and give up the hobby as a serious endeavor. direct to disc is a nice niche of super sounding choices. 100 out of 12,000 pressings. with 30-40 or so great music too. tape sourced 45rpm reissues (i own approx 1500) are a much more legit target delivering lots more value and selection with great performances.....if not quite reaching the SQ heights of the finest direct to discs...
I'm up to >300 distinct D2D titles. Every time I think I'm close to the end I find more I've never seen, mainly from Japan but also Europe. They captivate me based on their superior SQ, I reckon they're at the tippy top of analog recording technology, maybe eclipsing 30 ips. The good news is they're still being produced. Third Man Records has their direct-to-acetate series. There are others coming out of the Netherlands and UK. Kevin Gray has said he will do a few D2D in the near future and a little bird told me a prominent artist is doing acoustic covers of their catalog on D2D, out sometime next year. I can't wait!
 
Alternate takes are sometimes fascinating to listen to, especially with jazz musicians as you can compare how they improvise on different takes. If you listen to them, you will also find out that all musicians do "screw up" once in a while!

As a musician, I know that none of us can achieve total perfection in our craft.

Screw-ups are an inescapable reality in this physical existance.
 
If the focus is on note perfection and not musical magic we are lost.

Exactly the problem with most direct to disc pressings

Perhaps screw-up is the wrong term here as this isn't exactly what I was referring to though. The best musicians of the 60's, 70's and early 80's had the most polished and refined acts on record, the kind that completely moved and engaged a listener regardless of its technical proficiencies.

This is not something that is achieved in a single take.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AudioHR

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu