Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[the sound of Tao]

If you find digital dull, lifeless and artifical, then you have a problem with digital implementation in your system. It's not a problem of digital per se.

It’s hard to make sense Al (when it’s clearly out of perspective and not reflective of any top end experience) when you get ott melodramatic comments like all digital recordings are as harsh AF or digital blows analogue away to quote the more hyperbolic end of unreasoning audio debate extremism here.

When I read the more extreme posts I’m left wondering if people’s systems are broken or something else is at play in their perceptions or hearing?? It’s hard to reconcile these extremes as understandable experiences. It would help if the more intractable at the extremes always shared their gear details to provide additional perspective. When I read of many people’s setups here I completely get their great passion and the various format championing. There’s some fairly amazing examples of gears and setups here across both sides of the great divide.

I just figure most all of us have a preference out of experience or our need for analogue or digital formats and most of us seem confident of getting good sound and involving music (and this certainly hasn’t always been the case) from their chosen formats. It’s not just about the format but also supporting it with well chosen system matching throughout to optimise their various sources. Even the best of gear can be turned mundane with a bit of poor management.

But given how much expertise, effort and budget so many put in it’s hard to understand people getting genuinely unbearably or completely unlistenable results in the formats they work with. Sure some are clearly likely to be better at one or the other than perhaps others but there is just no excuse for being stuck with harsh af sound these days. It strikes me more as just bad management.

These format debates are always eventually infused with a minority melodrama from an unrelenting loud few. But it’s a distraction that doesn’t help any of us in finding solutions about why there are clear preferences or in our building better understanding of anything… it’s just that disproportionate insistent predictable unreasonable noise that always winds up and forever fans the eternal format flame and powers the audiophile angst ad infinitum ah yes go for it fellas

 

[the sound of Tao]

And then you also have Audio's Circle of Confusion, which puts into question meaningful standardization and with that, claims of "accuracy":

Audio's Circle of Confusion

Audio’s “Circle of Confusion” is a term coined by Floyd Toole [1] that describes the confusion that exists within the audio recording and r...

seanolive.blogspot.com

PS I think I know why they didn’t make an acronym out of Toole’s Audio’s Circle Of Confusion… or more concisely Toole’s ACOC

 

[hopkins]

If you find digital dull, lifeless and artifical, then you have a problem with digital implementation in your system. It's not a problem of digital per se.

I am very happy with the lively, exciting yet also well-flowing music from digital that I hear at home.

My comment was meant to reflect what most people (even many non-audiophiles) find appealing about vinyl vs digital, and does not reflect my (recent) experience with digital in my system, as I have mentioned before.

 

[microstrip]

PS I think I know why they didn’t make an acronym out of Toole’s Audio’s Circle Of Confusion… or more concisely Toole’s ACOC

Toole did not call it Audio Circle of Confusion, he called it just "Circle of Confusion". He also explains how psychoacoustics and proper measurements can break the circle.

 

[microstrip]

To circle back to digital vs analog... It seems that vinyl appeals to many because they find it breathes life into the sound, whereas digital seems dull and artificial. (...)

Our memories vanish with time - about forty years ago audiophiles applied similar words to the sound of moving coil cartridges versus moving magnet cartridges - MC's were glorified , MM's were bashed as an inferior product ...

Curiously at that time audiophiles did not compare them to tape.

For me the interesting technical subject is why some people consider that vinyl "breathes life in the sound".

 

[Al M.]

My comment was meant to reflect what most people (even many non-audiophiles) find appealing about vinyl vs digital, and does not reflect my (recent) experience with digital in my system, as I have mentioned before.

Point taken. However, didn't you say you found digital "veiled" sounding in comparison with vinyl? That was another head scratcher for me (yet I could see how that would more easily apply to some less optimal streaming).

I also am not sure if "most" audiophiles applies. I have the suspicion that the anti-digital crowd is just more loud and vocal, which might skew impressions. Honestly, I had thought that in recent years the mood had changed on WBF towards, perhaps often silent, acceptance of digital as an equal medium. That is why I am surprised at the vehemence of the current discussion -- it seems like a throwback to WBF from 10 years ago.

 

[bonzo75]

Digital vs analog is ultimately about recordings anyway.

Recordings show performances

Systems should show recordings

Minor correction, but spot on.

 

[hopkins]

Our memories vanish with time - about forty years ago audiophiles applied similar words to the sound of moving coil cartridges versus moving magnet cartridges - MC's were glorified , MM's were bashed as an inferior product ...

Curiously at that time audiophiles did not compare them to tape.

For me the interesting technical subject is why some people consider that vinyl "breathes life in the sound".

You could also ask why, for many, digital does not perform optimally? Perhaps there are specific issues with digital playback that are important and absent from analog playback (though it has its own, different, issues) ?

The technical discussions are endless. Measurements and graphs don't really mean anything for us "end users", and we never really know how technical aspects translate into actual listening impressions.

It's best to just try different approaches, listen and compare, and make an opinion for yourself. Listening impressions (including my own, obviously) have to be taken with a lot of skepticism.

 

[hopkins]

Point taken. However, didn't you say you found digital "veiled" sounding in comparison with vinyl? That was another head scratcher for me (yet I could see how that would more easily apply to some less optimal streaming).

I also am not sure if "most" audiophiles applies. I have the suspicion that the anti-digital crowd is just more loud and vocal, which might skew impressions. Honestly, I had thought that in recent years the mood had changed on WBF towards, perhaps often silent, acceptance of digital as an equal medium. That is why I am surprised at the vehemence of the current discussion -- it seems like a throwback to WBF from 10 years ago.

I guess I should have said "often veiled"...

 

[Al M.]

You could also ask why, for many, digital does not perform optimally? Perhaps there are specific issues with digital playback that are important and absent from analog playback (though it has its own, different, issues) ?

True. Digital is more vulnerable to issues that may diminish its musicality and its ability to sound natural. In that sense it is a more fragile medium.

Vinyl on the other hand is a more robust medium. Even if it does not sound optimal there is mostly still an underlying musicality and naturalness to the sound that is hard to break.

I am speaking in generalities here. I have heard bad vinyl too, and some pop pressings from the 1970s are just horrible and unmusical (well done digital remasterings of that music sound so much better). The so called golden age of vinyl, before the advent of digital, often wasn't that golden either.

 

[bonzo75]

The so called golden age of vinyl, before the advent of digital, often wasn't that golden either.

Sticky for cluelessness. The ability to make statements confidently without exposure, you take the cake

 

[microstrip]

You could also ask why, for many, digital does not perform optimally? Perhaps there are specific issues with digital playback that are important and absent from analog playback (though it has its own, different, issues) ?

It has been addressed by professionals - vinyl and digital have different characteristics, even recording using them needs different techniques.

The technical discussions are endless. Measurements and graphs don't really mean anything for us "end users", and we never really know how technical aspects translate into actual listening impressions.

Well, technical does not mean measurements and graphs, although they usually can be of help to understand, not predict some subjective aspects.

It's best to just try different approaches, listen and compare, and make an opinion for yourself. Listening impressions (including my own, obviously) have to be taken with a lot of skepticism.

And then each of us stays with his own listening bias ...

BTW, you should read the opinions of most (not all, surely ) vinyl experts in this forum - their systems were under suboptimal until they learned the last trick, set up of turntables at shops and forums are miserable, the process used by their neighbor or the magazine expert is flawed, 99% of the vinyl audiophiles have poor set up ...

 

[ScottK]

Digital is there now. My Playback Designs digital is as good or better than my excellent Reed 3C turntable vinyl. Each is about MSRP $40K. I did a comparison again last week because of all the chatter on this thread claiming digital is inferior.

I have done the same and that's why I did the original post. In my system the the best vinyl recordings to my ears still sounded better...more real. It was however a close run thing. Then the question for me then becomes convenience.

 

[Al M.]

Sticky for cluelessness. The ability to make statements confidently without exposure, you take the cake

I do have exposure. I have heard *lots* of vinyl over the years in a number of different systems, and have often praised and even defended vinyl playback, also on WBF.

Why are you lying, Ked? Or are you simply oblivious to what I have said about vinyl over the years? Either way, it does not look good on you.

 

[bonzo75]

I do have exposure. I have heard *lots* of vinyl over the years in a number of different systems, and have often praised and even defended vinyl playback, also on WBF.

Why are you lying, Ked? Or are you simply oblivious to what I have said about vinyl over the years? Either way, it does not look good on you.

No you haven’t, liar. There is not a single post of yours showing the golden era vinyl heard, and compared. Your general posts of analog itself are low but that is besides the point. Listening to some vinyl at Ian’s does not qualify golden era exposure. Peter and ack don’t collect golden era LPs. This is no different to you claiming SETs horns exposure.

 

[bonzo75]

I have no idea why your ego is so poor that you have to make claims of things you haven’t heard to make a point. Educate yourself on some golden era vinyl instead of winning the forum debate

 

[ScottK]

Digital vs analog is ultimately about recordings anyway.

Recordings show performances

Systems show recordings

Amen.

 

[Al M.]

I have no idea why your ego is so poor that you have to make claims of things you haven’t heard to make a point. Educate yourself on some golden era vinyl instead of winning the forum debate

What do bad pop pressings from the 1970s, which I was referring to, have to do with any of that? Sure, you probably define the golden era of vinyl as the 50s and 60s. I specifically talked about it as the era from before the advent of digital -- which is when vinyl ruled. Are you completely unable to read things in context?

 

[bonzo75]

What do bad pop pressings from the 1970s, which I was referring to, have to do with any of that? Sure, you probably define the golden era of vinyl as the 50s and 60s. I specifically talked about it as the era from before the advent of digital. Are you completely unable to read things in context?

so now you are changing golden era vinyl meaning to be old vinyl from 70s?

 

[bonzo75]

anyone for example, picking up golden era decca picks up a certain set of numbers, and even engineers depending on the matrix in deadwax. They are picking up a certain era of recording, engineering, and early stampers.

read up RCA Dynagroove to know why the RCA era stopped.

read up on DGG to know why the DGG era stopped.

you could do yours for various labels. And that’s just classical.