Both the ADC and DAC produces losses and non-linearities.
An ADC chops up the analog signal thru its finite sampling, and discards the information outside of its sample points!
Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?
- Thread starter ScottK
- Start date
Both the ADC and DAC produces losses and non-linearities.
An ADC chops up the analog signal thru its finite sampling, and discards the information outside of its sample points!
Yes, obviously that is what sampling does, but until we get the DAC portion right you won't know whether the sampling is itself an issue...
Software is the biggest compromise! We would all like perfect pressings of perfect recordings, both nonsuch exists.
Direct to disc is as close as we can get currently. Listen to the LA4 and Lincoln Mayorga.
As for reference vinyl playback, the TechDAS Air Force Zero combined with the reference SAT CF1 tonearm and Air Tight Opus (the most neutral and transparent I have heard), fed to the Zanden 1200 signature will open your eyes to what is possible.
Everything digital currently does is a potential issue. It has been modeled and tested in order to substantiate the theories of its design.
The biggest issues on the DAC side are time distortion at the input, quantization distortion and nonlinearity, conversion nonlinerity and phase distortion of the analog output stage.
If you take the time to read one of my first posts on this thread plus the two links I have given later in this thread, you will understand why digital sounds different to analogue with the conclusion being they are two different sources.
Here is another article on digital music from Chord Electronics in their M Scaler DAC Technology;
and a video from Rob Watts working for Chord Electronics also on their DAC technology;
Regardless, the point is that we don't know whether sampling in itself (ADC) is an issue until we get the conversion back to analog right.
Have you heard the DaVa fieldcoil Cartridge and Kuzma Safir arm by any chance?
Last edited:
Could it be we're discussing the wrong things here?
I very much enjoy the reproduction from tape and other analog formats, but knowing how the sausage is done, it is crystal clear it is not because it is more resolute, has less noise, is more linear or any other explanation provided here that I've read so far. We don't need to lie about reality in order to find explanations for things.
Could it be we simply found a series of formats in the analog domain that effectively hack our perception? That just gel very nicely with our psychoacoustic realities?
For example, specific types of noise actually increase our ability to perceive low level detail. This is a much better explanation about why I may like a tape better than because 'it has more resolution than digital'. At least it has a shot at being true.
I very much enjoy the reproduction from tape and other analog formats, but knowing how the sausage is done, it is crystal clear it is not because it is more resolute, has less noise, is more linear or any other explanation provided here that I've read so far. We don't need to lie about reality in order to find explanations for things.
Could it be we simply found a series of formats in the analog domain that effectively hack our perception? That just gel very nicely with our psychoacoustic realities?
For example, specific types of noise actually increase our ability to perceive low level detail. This is a much better explanation about why I may like a tape better than because 'it has more resolution than digital'. At least it has a shot at being true.
You may poopoo the fact that analog is capable of considerably more resolution than digital. But this is readily measureable, let alone heard.
ADC's throw away the vital information that good analog recordings retain and preserve.
Please don't take this as me poopooing on your experience on anything. I share your experience, I like listening to most tape more than most vinyl, and most vinyl to most digital.
But I don't need to:
1. justify why. I just do and that should be enough.
2. bend reality in order to justify it, if I choose to try and justify it.
By definition analog media has a cap on resolution, unlike digital media. It has moving electromechanic parts, moving parts have inertia, material and fabrication limits, and those are hard limits. Just what it is. Same for dynamic range, SNR, etc. All of those things are measurably less performant that the phone in our pockets in a state of the art turntable.
I'm saying that we could perhaps focus of discussing what the 'vital information' is that makes analog reproduction so compelling. Because I also hear it, but I'm not convinced ADC and DAC limitation enumeration are a good way to go at it. A R2R lists as more limited in every dimension, so it is clear we're not listing every relevant dimension to what we're trying to discuss.
No digital medium is current capable of high (fine) resolution. It doesn' t come close to what analog is capable of.
Which tells me that you have neither heard nor measured the current SOTA in turntable performance.
Repeating things like a mantra is a sure way to kill conversation and debate. So is assuming what one has heard, measured, studied or does in a derogatory way to drive a point against the grain of the world. Especially to someone who just said they agree with your conclusion, but he's not convinced about your reasons and reasoning.
Take the cookie, you're well suited for todays digital debate age, ironically enough. I'm not.
Take the cookie, you're well suited for todays digital debate age, ironically enough. I'm not.
The one thing we seem to all agree on is the fact that the quality of the recording (recording engineer stuff) has the greatest impact across formats. Perhaps that's what should be investigated further as to to understand why a CD can, in many cases, sound "as good" or better than some vinyl or a HiRes format. This may be at the core of the Digital vs Analog debate. Or as RCanelas argues psychoacoustic phenomena?
Take a look at my thread, as I have also come to the conclusion that the mastering process has the most overall impact on sound quality, regardless of medium:
Re-Mastering Your High-End Audio System
Republicoftexas69
Well-Known Member
You are definitely on the right track here. The distortions and compressions in vinyl and magnetic tape playback are euphoric. These saturation and phase effects can be added to digital recordings to make them sound more “analog”.
Last edited:
Here's a comparison of a direct to disc AAA recording vs a 24/96 digital recording of a live performance run simultaneously. Long story short the AAA blows away the digital.
IMO digital can sound good but needs special attention.
www.youtube.com
IMO digital can sound good but needs special attention.
- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
www.youtube.com
This reminds me of how top quality film in static photography did, possibly still does, have more resolution than digital backs. Similar subject IMO.
But yes, I can see how 'kind' distortions, artefacts and even tape hiss can do strange things to our auditory system. I have no idea medically why, I am relaying just what I can hear. Anyone have any other theories on why?
Measurements and tech data tell us something, but hard core listening also has merit IMO in designing any audio product to go 'beyond' tech data alone.
I wonder what the resolution of our ears really is, if we tried to 'digitise it? To get the exact same sound hard wired to the brain. My dogs probably think any hifi we care to play around them sounds aweful Ha Ha.
George, in reading all your posts it is very apparent to me that you are still stuck in the 80’s, at the advent of digital with Sony and Phillips. Most of what you write is very dated. You speak of sampling associated with PCM, but not a single word on Direcr Stream Digital.
Have you listen to current state of the art digital playback lately? I’m not talking about dCS, or MSB, or Wadax. I’m speaking of the T+A SD3100HV or DAC200 dacs feed 512x48 native DSD or 1024x48 DSD from HQPLAYER?
Take a look at the Signalyst website and learn about the digital filters and modulators that have been developed and used in HQPLAYER to not only extract low level information and increase perceived resolution of digital recordings but to also address some of the issues found in digital files. HQPLAYER is powerful enough to allow you perform your own convolutions.
It is a great new digital world today and it’s time for you to leave the 80’s in the past.
Similar threads
