Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[Mike Lavigne]

Also has anyone compared DSD and other hi res files / streaming to vinyl?

yes, many times. i do it every day.

the questions is, have you yourself done that? if so, please tell us about it.

It blows away Vinyl so hard it's not even funny .
Actually DSD is the closest to the sound that was recorded in the studio , he can hear no difference to at all.
Paul from PS Audio says it himself .
And vinyl "has a sound of it's own " That's a direct quote from him .
Not to mention that vinyl is a copy from the digital master .
Nothing can sound better than the master itself, period .

we had a whole thread about this, 422 posts and it might be educational to read it. it's not skewed one way or another.

in that thread, here was my response.

Paul McGowan is just a guy with a blog. he has no particular credibility on formats. he just wants to sell stuff. caveat emptor. tell us how Paul knows anything more than anyone else.

 

[PYP]

The Hi-Res digital release of the album is spectacular as well.

one of the best examples of how great streaming digital can sound (Chet, 192/24). When I was playing this my wife dropped by and asked if it was Chet and said how much she enjoyed it. She never says anything like "The sound is great" because she simply hears it as engagement with the music. Qobuz, of course, does have other 192/24 recordings, but these vary in quality. Must be the mastering. Some of the Coltrane hi-rez aren't great. And sometimes, when several resolutions are available, I'll choose a lower resolution. Again, must be the mastering.

My own view is that the medium isn't the key to musical engagement. It is the mastering. And I'm assuming the market leans toward better mastering (and remastering) for the vinyl crowd (often very demanding -- good, keep the standard high).

And collectors might pay $1,000 for a tape (see link below) but would anyone pay that for a CD or download? Not! (and for that kind of money you could buy a pretty good fuse -- OK, just kidding, no offense).

Is this tape any good? Well, just listening through the iMac's speakers (not great) the quality if instantly obvious.

 

[Carlos269]

My own view is that the medium isn't the key to musical engagement. It is the mastering.

This is the same conclusion that I have arrived at myself. That is, the greatest impact on a recording’s ultimate sound quality is achieved in the mastering process. This is precisely why I started remastering recordings myself. I have taken the concept a step further and started implementing the same principles & techniques to remastering high-end audio systems’ presentation:

Remastering the high-end audio system

This process allows me to dial in the sound of the system to present the music in the way that I want to hear it reproduced.

 

[ScottK]

While I‘m in heated agreement that the mastering process is key, other more psychological factors can also greatly impact our perception of SQ. For me the two most relevant are what I call “listening mood” and “relative plateau”.
There are days when I think l’ve reached audio Nirvana with my system only to come back the next day thinking the sound is off or wrong. I attribute this to listening mood. Happens a lot. Then whenever I insert a new component to my system that is transformative (like my new Alexx V’s) I’m back to the wow factor yet again. But after a while my ear/brain adjusts to the new sound and I‘m back on a relative plateau. I’ve become acclimated.to the new sound and it’s the new normal. It does come back immediately after time away or spending time with another hifi system of lessor quality. Both these factor, for me, are huge compared to other tweaks or even component shifts.

 

[Carlos269]

While I‘m in heated agreement that the mastering process is key, other more psychological factors can also greatly impact our perception of SQ. For me the two most relevant are what I call “listening mood” and “relative plateau”.
There are days when I think l’ve reached audio Nirvana with my system only to come back the next day thinking the sound is off or wrong. I attribute this to listening mood. Happens a lot. Then whenever I insert a new component to my system that is transformative (like my new Alexx V’s) I’m back to the wow factor yet again. But after a while my ear/brain adjusts to the new sound and I‘m back on a relative plateau. I’ve become acclimated.to the new sound and it’s the new normal. It does come back immediately after time away or spending time with another hifi system of lessor quality. Both these factor, for me, are huge compared to other tweaks or even component shifts.

Are you targeting a certain sound? Do you have a goal in mind? Or do you just take it as it comes? In other words, with your speaker or component upgrades are you searching for something? Setting a course or direction for your audio system? Or are you at the mercy of the proverbial magical “fortune cookie”? You see this is precisely what my mind never allowed itself to warp itself around, that is the lack of control and the sound of the system being unpredictable and subjected to trial and error. What I have developed is a system and process where you can just dial-in exactly what you want without hoping that your next upgrade gets you closer to your goal, or whatever it is that the system is lacking. This is a smarter way.

 

[PYP]

While I‘m in heated agreement that the mastering process is key, other more psychological factors can also greatly impact our perception of SQ. For me the two most relevant are what I call “listening mood” and “relative plateau”.
There are days when I think l’ve reached audio Nirvana with my system only to come back the next day thinking the sound is off or wrong. I attribute this to listening mood. Happens a lot. Then whenever I insert a new component to my system that is transformative (like my new Alexx V’s) I’m back to the wow factor yet again. But after a while my ear/brain adjusts to the new sound and I‘m back on a relative plateau. I’ve become acclimated.to the new sound and it’s the new normal. It does come back immediately after time away or spending time with another hifi system of lessor quality. Both these factor, for me, are huge compared to other tweaks or even component shifts.

do you find that the plateau lasts longer as you are progressing with your setup? Personally, once the setup reaches a certain level of musical engagement, my upgrade fever diminishes substantially.

Have found vigorous exercise to enhance listening mood. But I know that is "digital" to others' "analog" of libation.

 

[PYP]

Are you targeting a certain sound? Do you have a goal in mind? Or do you just take it as it comes? In other words, with your speaker or component upgrades are you searching for something? Setting a course or direction for your audio system? Or at you at the mercy of the proverbial magical “fortune cookie”? You see this is precisely what my mind never allowed itself to warp itself around, that is the lack of control and the sound of the system being unpredictable and subjected to trial and error. What I have developed is a system and process where you can just dial-in exactly what you want without hoping that your next upgrade gets you closer to your goal, or whatever it is that the system is lacking. This is a smarter way.

if I had something as convenient as a dial to dial in the sound, I'd probably use that on some bad recordings. But that would be to dial down the noise. How does one recover resolution and transparency if they aren't on the original?

 

[Carlos269]

if I had something as convenient as a dial to dial in the sound, I'd probably use that on some bad recordings. But that would be to dial down the noise. How does one recover resolution and transparency if they aren't on the original?

You dig deeper into the recordings to extract the low level inner details and micro-dynamics through the use of HQPLAYER. The software uses the same techniques and technologies that are used by the military to listen for submarines through the ocean’s noise. This level of refinement allows one to listen through the noise floor of the recordings for additional perceived resolution. Once this additional information is available, along with the rest of the recording, it can be remastered by following traditional mastering principles and techniques.

 

[ScottK]

Are you targeting a certain sound? Do you have a goal in mind? Or do you just take it as it comes? In other words, with your speaker or component upgrades are you searching for something? Setting a course or direction for your audio system? Or are you at the mercy of the proverbial magical “fortune cookie”? You see this is precisely what my mind never allowed itself to warp itself around, that is the lack of control and the sound of the system being unpredictable and subjected to trial and error. What I have developed is a system and process where you can just dial-in exactly what you want without hoping that your next upgrade gets you closer to your goal, or whatever it is that the system is lacking. This is a smarter way.

Interesting and complex questions. My answer “sorta”. I think we all want sound true to the original source, the absolute sound. How do we get there? A big part is indeed trail and error. I don’t know how else you can do it. Sure if you have speakers that dip to 1.7 ohms you need high current amp. So that narrows it down to say 500 products. system synergy is a very elusive thing. Ideally we could audition hundreds of comments in our listening room and then somehow with all those permutations make a choice. There’s no silver bullet. I don’t like or use DSP. Ultimately I think if one buys quality components they will get you most of the way there. It’s not science but art.

 

[Carlos269]

I think we all want sound true to the original source, the absolute sound.

And here lies the crux of the matter, “The Absolute Sound”. This is the ideal that has fostered and propelled high-end audio. Yet every system sounds different. Every manufacturer “voices” their system differently. Then you ask yourself the philosophical question of, do you want to faithfully reproduce what’s on the recording? Or do you want to faithfully reproduce the artist’s intent? See as you mature as an audiophile, you start to question the concept of the absolute sound, this mythical goal that has no real true way of being verified or confirmed. Furthermore as you become familiar with the recording process you realize that there is no way back to that “absolute sound” and the best that we can expect to reproduce is what the mastering engineer intended the recording to sound like. Yet many still pursue the “absolute sound” at all costs. Like Santa Claus, I hate to break it to you but this aim is futile.

Many on this forum roll tubes; why do you think that is? Many roll components? Others roll speakers. We are all changing something to get that sound that is in our head. It is that sound in our head that becomes our “absolute sound”.

So there are, in my view, only two known ways to go about chasing that sound in our head. One is the traditional trial and error method, which pretty much amounts to shooting in the dark and hoping to hit the mark. Or two, come up with a way to simply dial in the sound to match what’s in your head, and that’s what I have done.

 

[ScottK]

And here lies the crux of the matter, “The Absolute Sound”. This is the ideal that has fostered and propelled high-end audio. Yet every system sounds different. Every manufacturer “voices” their system differently. Then you ask yourself the philosophical question of, do you want to faithfully reproduce what’s on the recording? Or do you want to faithfully reproduce the artist’s intent? See as you mature as an audiophile, you start to question the concept of the absolute sound, this mythical goal that has no real true way of being verified or confirmed. Furthermore as you become familiar with the recording process you realize that there is no way back to that “absolute sound” and the best that we can expect to reproduce is what the mastering engineer intended the recording to sound like. Yet many still pursue the “absolute sound” at all costs. Like Santa Claus, I hate to break it to you but this aim is futile.

Many on this forum roll tubes; why do you think that is? Many roll components? Others roll speakers. We are all changing something to get that sound that is in our head. It is that sound in our head that becomes our “absolute sound”.

So there are, in my view, only two known ways to go about chasing that sound in our head. One is the traditional trial and error method, which pretty much amounts to shooting in the dark and hoping to hit the mark. Or two, come up with a way to simply dial in the sound to match what’s in your head, and that’s what I have done.

Ps That’s why it’s a hobby.

 

[Carlos269]

Ps That’s why it’s a hobby.

You can always choose to pursue the hobby in a smarter way!

 

[Tuckers]

I think many traditional and skilled musicians still prefer doing their work in an Analog studio laying tracks to tape, many do recognize that a digital interface will be used at one stage in the process.

This is a good thing, but I am concerned that this dicotomy in the studio leads to greater generational and cultural gaps in music. Those that know about the quality of analog recording and the extra care and handling it requires are few. And it is mostly a generational thing. Younger artists grew up manipulating sound with their phones and laptops, their brains are more wired this way, and the music they create more based on this process. There are young artists that like the retro flavor of analog, but they are in the extreme minority of their peers. This discussion mainly focuses on music that is more than 40 years ago. If this threads discussion was focused on current music, I suspect it would be much different. Don't get me wrong though, most of my cherished music is from 20 to 80 years old.

One of my favorite recordings is a Direct to Disc vinyl, 24-96 digital rip of Billie Eilish Live at Third Man Records. I understand the vinyl is unobtanium. This rip is exceedingly clean and shows off the qualities of the Direct to Disc process similar to my collection of classic D2D records. It is one of the best live acoustic vocal/guitar recordings I've heard in years.

 

[Tuckers]

Paul McGowan is just a guy with a blog. he has no particular credibility on formats. he just wants to sell stuff. caveat emptor. tell us how Paul knows anything more than anyone else.

Absolutely agree!

 

[wil]

While I‘m in heated agreement that the mastering process is key, other more psychological factors can also greatly impact our perception of SQ. For me the two most relevant are what I call “listening mood” and “relative plateau”.
There are days when I think l’ve reached audio Nirvana with my system only to come back the next day thinking the sound is off or wrong. I attribute this to listening mood. Happens a lot. Then whenever I insert a new component to my system that is transformative (like my new Alexx V’s) I’m back to the wow factor yet again. But after a while my ear/brain adjusts to the new sound and I‘m back on a relative plateau. I’ve become acclimated.to the new sound and it’s the new normal. It does come back immediately after time away or spending time with another hifi system of lessor quality. Both these factor, for me, are huge compared to other tweaks or even component shifts.

The Mind: our most powerful audio component.

 

[microstrip]

Interesting and complex questions. My answer “sorta”. I think we all want sound true to the original source, the absolute sound. (...)

Unfortunately "sound true to the original source" means different things to different audiophiles ... Can you explain what is your particular meaning?

 

[microstrip]

Interesting and complex questions. My answer “sorta”. I think we all want sound true to the original source, the absolute sound. How do we get there? A big part is indeed trail and error. I don’t know how else you can do it. (...)

I would say, trial, error and faith - faith being a synonymous for positive bias.

Our brain fills the large gap between real music and sound reproduction. It will not carry its duty unless he feels motivated ...

 

[Audiophile666]

Unfortunately "sound true to the original source" means different things to different audiophiles ... Can you explain what is your particular meaning?

Actually it's pretry simple
A system that adds or detracts nothing from the original recording / electrical signal

 

[Joe Whip]

This is a good thing, but I am concerned that this dicotomy in the studio leads to greater generational and cultural gaps in music. Those that know about the quality of analog recording and the extra care and handling it requires are few. And it is mostly a generational thing. Younger artists grew up manipulating sound with their phones and laptops, their brains are more wired this way, and the music they create more based on this process. There are young artists that like the retro flavor of analog, but they are in the extreme minority of their peers. This discussion mainly focuses on music that is more than 40 years ago. If this threads discussion was focused on current music, I suspect it would be much different. Don't get me wrong though, most of my cherished music is from 20 to 80 years old.

One of my favorite recordings is a Direct to Disc vinyl, 24-96 digital rip of Billie Eilish Live at Third Man Records. I understand the vinyl is unobtanium. This rip is exceedingly clean and shows off the qualities of the Direct to Disc process similar to my collection of classic D2D records. It is one of the best live acoustic vocal/guitar recordings I've heard in years.

Where did you get the rip?

 

[microstrip]

(...) Paul McGowan is just a guy with a blog. he has no particular credibility on formats. he just wants to sell stuff. caveat emptor. tell us how Paul knows anything more than anyone else.

Well, IMO Paul McGowan is not just a guy with a blog. He is a manufacturer with long lasting connections to the industry, a designer/manufacturer of very good quality electronics and his blog incudes hundreds of excellent articles, a magazine and a forum. Surely this does not make in an authority in formats, but the transparency created by the public exposition of his blog opens his ideas to scrutiny - we can know why he thinks so. It would be great if other manufacturers had such attitude towards this hobby. And surely Paul wants to promote his products, it is the PSAudio site!

I was never a fan of his old DACs, but recently I listened to one of his latest designs sounding very good.