Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[Al M.]

I was trying to describe “compression” , perhaps you might shine a more illuminating light on it?

There is no compression in uncompressed digital (CD and "hi-res"), only in formats such as MP3, AAC etc.

 

[Lee]

I agree completely with you Tima, and would like to add something to consider, that we are comparing apples and oranges.

The pure analogue recording and playback process to/from vinyl is very low tech. Forgetting about cylinders and 78's that established/formed the process used, if we just look at commercially available long-play (33RPM) vinyl records the technology has been pretty much the same since 1930, when RCA Victor released the first examples, and the best-sounding examples of pure-analogue records made today are made in pretty much the exact same way as then.

Digitally-processed music, whether on CD, MPV, hard drive or stream, uses much higher (newer) technology than analogue recordings and that technology is constantly improving. Digitally-processed music sounds unique and is loved by many. It sounds different to pure-analogue because it is different.

A primitive analogue recording to magnetic tape, or direct to disc, is capturing the actual sound waves (all of them) from the musicians/singers in real time, then playing it back by reversing the process and amplifying the output.

The more technical digital process (beyond my ability to convey fully, but generally) is a conversion of the most dominant sound waves (those that would not be heard because of louder waves are by algorithm cut to save on processing and storage) into a series of measurements of the sound waves, and it is those measurements which are then recorded as on/off codes (bitstream) or groups (eg. 20-bit bytes) that must be decoded and converted back into the frequencies segments that were recorded (not those cut) and played back as an interpretation of those original sound waves. Sort of like trying to put Humpty-Dumpty together again. Consider the difference of sound between SET and Push Pull amplification. Push Pull divides the signal and then recombines it in order to achieve greater power, but in the process looses something in comparison to SET.

IMHO, the process involved in converting analogue to digital and then back to an analogue rendition will always give a character to the sound that is discernible by many (usually those who prefer pure analogue) and will never sound the same a pure analogue.

I believe one can argue that the density of musical information matters more here than how new the technology is. Vinyl is on par with hirez digital in overall sound and magnetic tape has more musical information than LP and any digital.

 

[Al M.]

The wisest people I’ve met are usually acutely aware of how little they actually “know.” They are more interested in continuing to expand and modify their present state of knowledge.

Agreed. This is also the difference between naive engineers, such as on the "Audio Science Review" forum, who think they know everything and their measurements tell them anything they need to know, and scientists and science-minded engineers. The latter are aware that the more they know, the more they also know what they don't know.

 

[Lee]

As a practical matter, many new recordings are done in digital, and with a little luck hirez. We can argue that digital playback is ideal there.

 

[christoph]

Because he told me privately and his opinions are no longer shared here.

Fair enough, but then why "imply" anyways "here" at all?

 

[Lee]

Agreed. The problem with these “discussions” is that they become dominated (infected?) by some with an axe to grind. And they keep grinding and grinding.

They present their fundamentalist views as “fact”, never acknowledging the possibility that their self- proclaimed expertise might be limited.

The wisest people I’ve met are usually acutely aware of how little they actually “know.” They are more interested in continuing to expand and modify their present state of knowledge.

Very well said.

 

[SoundMann]

No one on planet earth can seriously claim vinyl is better View attachment 113849View attachment 113850View attachment 113851

I am the BORG. This is the only truth. You will be assimilated!

 

[Audiophile666]

I am the BORG. This is the only truth. You will be assimilated!

Science is the boss , I'm just telling it as it is

 

[ScottK]

My bad but it is like being there. Love it.

But it would be even better on vinyl!

 

[SoundMann]

Science is the boss , I'm just telling it as it is

And I have conducted peer-reviewed scientific tests that prove that digital is the least accurate of the three major recording formats!

 

[Lee]

Science is the boss , I'm just telling it as it is

But science is inconclusive here as each format has it’s own set distortions.

 

[Al M.]

And I have conducted peer-reviewed scientific tests that prove that digital is the least accurate of the three major recording formats!

LOL

 

[microstrip]

No worries. We have different experience and different exposure and different opinions. In the case of DDK’s system, the speakers are well matched to his ML3. This has a lot to do with why this system sounds the way it does on both digital and vinyl. By the way, I do not own the ML3. I own the original ML2. They are also well matched to my particular speakers. And digital also sounds good in my system, though I’ve only heard physical CDs.

Sorry Peter, but the usual "sounds good" intrinsically filled with condescendence considering all that you and DDK said about digital is not what we aim at WBF.

Yes, I’m fully aware of my ignorance. David explained to me the other day why digital sounds so good in his system. The reason surprised me. You should contact him and ask. Perhaps the reason will surprise you too. The system does not have to be optimized for one or the other as demonstrated by his system. The reason is much more basic.

I can't understand you. David explained you and you know why. And you are advising me to contact him to explain it. Did people who got information from him sign a non disclosure agreement? You are always saying you learned a lot from him, but every time you have to opportunity to explain something you became silent.

 

[Audiophile666]

a

And I have conducted peer-reviewed scientific tests that prove that digital is the least accurate of the three major recording formats!

Peer review or not
They can't argue with these facts .
Sorry .
But vinyl is so inferior it's not even a fair comparison

 

[microstrip]

And I have conducted peer-reviewed scientific tests that prove that digital is the least accurate of the three major recording formats!

Nice to know, but please supply a reference of your work. Listening tests are interesting but usually have a limited scope, due to the conditions in which they are carried. A prove is only valid for some circumstances - we expect reviewers of scientific work to look at the conclusions and see if the author also refers when they do not apply.

 

[SoundMann]

a

Peer review or not
They can't argue with these facts .
Sorry .
But vinyl is so inferior it's not even a fair comparison
View attachment 113855View attachment 113856
View attachment 113857

State of the art vinyl reproduction is way better by every quantifiable measure than your mass consumer level specs indicate.

 

[SoundMann]

Nice to know, but please supply a reference of your work.

I already explained here that I cannot. Someone else published a test here that produced the same results.

Please read the entire thread.

 

[Audiophile666]

State of the art vinyl reproduction is way better by every quantifiable measure than your mass consumer level specs indicate.

I agree that people can prefer vinyl sound to digital sound
It's just no one can claim it's better technically
You can like a Toyota Corolla but you can't claim it's better than a Ferrari

 

[SoundMann]

You can like a Toyota Corolla but you can't claim it's better than a Ferrari

Toyotas are run of the mill automobiles. I prefer classic Mercedes.

 

[microstrip]

I already explained here that I cannot. Someone else published a test here that produced the same results.

Please read the entire thread.

Then I suggest that you forget about referring it as a prove of anything. Sorry, but in such conditions it is not science, it is just coffee talk.