Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?
- Thread starter ScottK
- Start date
Have you heard a Lampizator Horizon or an MSB Select II or a Wadax playing high resolution local computer files?
(I never thought I ever would be defending digital!
)
Last edited:
Well finally, here is something that we can all agree on, I hope, that is that the dominant factor is the quality of the source recording.
If significant and impactful changes are to be made, they are done at the mastering stage.
That’s why my approach is the most powerful approach:
Remastering Your High-End System
I have heard such recently, yes. A far cry from redbook, but still not as convincing as I would like.
Have you heard a Lampizator Horizon or an MSB Select II or a Wadax playing high resolution local computer files?
(I never thought I ever would be slightly defending digital!
And I have often defended great vinyl playback against nitwits.
Still I am considered by many as an unthinking "shill for digital" because I don't have vinyl playback myself. Whatever. Let ignorants be ignorants.
And I am not going to tell you that your preference for digital is wrong.
If it works for you, so be it.
Listen to the metronome aqwo dac, it presents your analog device with problems in terms of sound. It results in a pitch-black deep bass with structure i never heard from a dac. it's gonna be hard to be better with vinyl.This is just one of many sound qualities I could have listed where it is better than others. For me, this dac is currently the benchmark and is worth every euroHave you heard a Lampizator Horizon or an MSB Select II or a Wadax playing high resolution local computer files?
(I never thought I ever would be slightly defending digital!
Sound exsample listen with headphones then you know what i mean
Independently of the belligerent style of the poster, we should not forget that many other people have similar preferences, particularly in the professional audio community.
Yes they show it. And that in high-end audio extremely little can be proved in conditions that audiophiles can accept.
What do you expect when people insist on ranking fruit comparing apples with oranges?
It is as pointless of arguing about ice cream flavors, or what women you find hot. yet is happens on audiophile forums ad infinitium.
The funny thing, this discussion reminds me of the ones that we used to have on this forum around 2015 or so. In the interim it appeared that we had grown out of them, at least to some extent, but here you have this weird throwback to "good ole times". As if it was 2015 -- or 1985, for that matter.
(Ok, I'll concede, in 1985 the discussion was much more warranted than it is today.)
The problem with digital is it sounds plasticky. I don’t know how to describe it, something like eating a fruit looking perfect but tasting raw. A little bit exaggerated to explain. That’s why you keep skipping songs after 30 seconds or finding yourself looking at your phone or reading.
And yes, I heard top of the line wadax, lampizator, MSB. There is the problem of believing that digital isn’t prone to degradation by copying, transferring, processing. IMHO because of this situation digital recordings are over processed, over copied, transferred over internet and converted to analog for mixing/mastering and back to digital again. Of course those things impart the signal even if we can not measure now. Even 1mt of ethernet cable makes a difference, over processing sure makes a difference and most probably in a bad way. Other problem is oversampling. It introduces ringing. I don’t know why but digital artifacts are unbearable for me.
A good source whether analog or digital can be determined when music keeps you focused, listening with your eyes closed and doing nothing. When music is stopped or album is finished it makes you wish the album should be longer, always keeps you listening more albums, more hours than you planned. It never tires you or lets you involve with another thing. Just listening and enjoying music. If this happens to you with digital then I’m happy for you but it did happen to me only with analog.
And yes, I heard top of the line wadax, lampizator, MSB. There is the problem of believing that digital isn’t prone to degradation by copying, transferring, processing. IMHO because of this situation digital recordings are over processed, over copied, transferred over internet and converted to analog for mixing/mastering and back to digital again. Of course those things impart the signal even if we can not measure now. Even 1mt of ethernet cable makes a difference, over processing sure makes a difference and most probably in a bad way. Other problem is oversampling. It introduces ringing. I don’t know why but digital artifacts are unbearable for me.
A good source whether analog or digital can be determined when music keeps you focused, listening with your eyes closed and doing nothing. When music is stopped or album is finished it makes you wish the album should be longer, always keeps you listening more albums, more hours than you planned. It never tires you or lets you involve with another thing. Just listening and enjoying music. If this happens to you with digital then I’m happy for you but it did happen to me only with analog.
Last edited:
I would agree that a "plasticky", synthetic sound signature, which I am also highly sensitive and allergic to, holds for a lot of computer audio (local files and, in particular, streaming).
But *NOT* for all of it.
Because of the complications of computer audio I stick with physical disc playback. It''s easier to obtain a natural sound with it.
A lot to unpack there. I will say that far more is lost copying an analog tape than is ever lost in digital. As for enjoyment, your present state of mind is important. I love jazz, but one day in the car, the traffic was so frustrating, that the music playing made it worse so off went the radio. While on WRTI. Jazz. Same is true for listening at home.
I can't agree, not entirely having been to many a recording studio years back. Live music is not the same as track over track layering in the studio which is what the majority of recorded music is, not a live band direct to tape or digital. Then there's the mix - down, effects / processing, compression + the engineers' flavoring. It ends up sounding little like a live performance, and this is from both a listener and musician on stage perspective.
you can rank different fruit. Kiwi, for example, has much more fiber and potassium than a banana
This only confuses the discussion. You can rank fruit objectively by chemical composition, but not subjectively by taste and preference.
Yes, we all know this 30 second song zapping is the favorite activity of people listening to digital - fortunately the more than one hundred owners of the Taiko Extreme manage to listen to one minute in average.
Why are you just addressing the worst of digital recordings, not the best of them?
In this hyperbolic hobby every thing makes a difference. Why do you expect high-end digital to be different?
Negative bias expectation created by the absence of vinyl artifacts or simply you listened only to systems unable to show digital at its best to create a positive bias expectation for the future.
I understand, I listen open eyes - I am an inferior kind of a listener
Although this happens with me for live performances, never happened with albums. Just reach for another one.
It happens sometimes, although I do not make plans to listen.
Well, I recognize that for me there is a limit of time to listen in a single session - may be around three hours, although some enjoyable sessions lasted for more than should have.
I also have a lot of other interesting things to do in life other than music.
I don't think you're an inferior kind of a listener. Maybe you don't like music at all.
Similar threads
