Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[Al M.]

In addition: perhaps you are right and streaming is generally worse than CDs (don't know I use only streaming and "local" files) or maybe it also has to do with acoustics. I really don't know, and I am just describing what I read and hear (from others). I am not saying it applies to all "digital" audiophiles, but at least a significant portion.

Our posts crossed. I wrote my last one while you posted.

 

[Al M.]

What DAC are you using ?

Schiit Yggdrasil LIM (Less Is More)

My digital chain is:
Simaudio Moon 260 DT CD transport > Empirical Audio Reference BNC cable (1.5 m) > Mutec MC 3+ USB reclocker > MIT Matrix SL Plus AES-EBU cable (1.5 m) > Schiit Yggdrasil LIM DAC

I don't use the USB function of the reclocker, but the reclocker is better than the regular Mutec MC 3+ (less jitter, at the least).

 

[Rexp]

Paradoxically, I believe that the question asked by the OP is of more interest to audiophiles that use only digital, than to audiophiles who only use analog.

Though they won't always admit it, many "digital only" audiophiles are in fact dissatisfied with the sound they get, on a significant number of albums. They long for a more "analog" sound.

This is the leitmotif behind a lot of discussions of digital topics on audio forums. I have also confirmed this through my personal interactions.

Even the more vocal supporters of digital audio sometimes seem like they are really trying to convince themselves rather than others.

The reason for this probably goes beyond the source material (CD sound quality). On many digital audio forums there are periodic episodes of collective euphoria around solutions. They are often short lived (less than a year). There is probably more voodoo involved with digital solutions than there are with analog. In other words - digital should be basic ("bits are bits") but it isn't, and no one seems to understand what's going on!

Witness this recent video (start at 0:30 if you want to skip the intro):

As a result, while digital offers practically free access to a vast amount of music, it seems many audiophiles gravitate towards the same music.

This is all a bit of a caricature, but am I wrong?

Good on Jay for his honest appraisal, I had an interesting convo with the reviewer of the T+A DAC200 that you, oddly IMO, accused of being biased by measurements.

He claims NO PCM DAC CAN PROPERLY CONVERT DIGITAL TO ANALOG.

Maybe Jay needs to try a DSD DAC and HQ Player upsampling.

 

[Al M.]

Good on Jay for his honest appraisal, I had an interesting convo with the reviewer of the T+A DAC200 that you, oddly IMO, accused of being biased by measurements.

He claims NO PCM DAC CAN PROPERLY CONVERT DIGITAL TO ANALOG.

Maybe Jay needs to try a DSD DAC and HQ Player upsampling.

Sure, some people make wild claims, usually to boost their favorite thingy.

Nothing to get too excited about.

 

[Rexp]

Another poster on the DAC200 discussion mentioned above

T+A HiFi - DAC 200 - Official Discussion Thread

I am still not sure I am understanding the actual signal path correctly. But I totally agree you seem to be right and I must be wrong. I am no specialist. So, let’s just take one single canal, say “Right”, do you mean : - PCM will go thru a “PCM to DSD” converting chip, then thru the “DSD to...

www.head-fi.org

Posted this:

I maintain that all oversampling done on ALL modern chips is flawed as perusal of any chip documentation will show a problematic sinusoidal ripple (directly related to sample freq) in the pass band from the low latency simple upsampling filters used - below is the example for the PCM1795 chip. And that ripple produces the pre-echoes which causes the sound to be more edgy, defined or have harshness/glare. Feed a DSD tru 1 bit converter high quality pc-processed upsampling and you eliminate the equiripple and the tiny but audible time domain echoes - resulting in smoother sound and maximizing soundstage.

Attachments​

• 

 

[PeterA]

Are there more analog or digital sources with SET horn and panel systems and or are they about the same? If not about the same, why not?

 

[Carlos269]

Good on Jay for his honest appraisal, I had an interesting convo with the reviewer of the T+A DAC200 that you, oddly IMO, accused of being biased by measurements.

He claims NO PCM DAC CAN PROPERLY CONVERT DIGITAL TO ANALOG.

Maybe Jay needs to try a DSD DAC and HQ Player upsampling.

DSD512 and DSD1024 from HQPLAYER converted through the T+A DAC200 is exceptional. The permutations of filters and modulators offered provide multiple options for every system and owners’ preferences. When you want to be hardcore about sound reproduction and want to take it to the highest level, HQPLAYER and the T+A DAC200 is the best option available. The results speak for themselves. The information retrieval and presentation are unmatched and represent the extreme of what is currently possible in sound reproduction playback today and for the foreseeable future.

 

[Carlos269]

Another poster on the DAC200 discussion mentioned above

T+A HiFi - DAC 200 - Official Discussion Thread

I am still not sure I am understanding the actual signal path correctly. But I totally agree you seem to be right and I must be wrong. I am no specialist. So, let’s just take one single canal, say “Right”, do you mean : - PCM will go thru a “PCM to DSD” converting chip, then thru the “DSD to...

www.head-fi.org

Posted this:

I maintain that all oversampling done on ALL modern chips is flawed as perusal of any chip documentation will show a problematic sinusoidal ripple (directly related to sample freq) in the pass band from the low latency simple upsampling filters used - below is the example for the PCM1795 chip. And that ripple produces the pre-echoes which causes the sound to be more edgy, defined or have harshness/glare. Feed a DSD tru 1 bit converter high quality pc-processed upsampling and you eliminate the equiripple and the tiny but audible time domain echoes - resulting in smoother sound and maximizing soundstage.

Attachments​

• 

Here is another insightful review:

T+A DAC200 DAC Review

 

[Rexp]

Here is another insightful review:

T+A DAC200 DAC Review

My problem with DACs that require HQPlayer is I don't want a PC in my room or elsewhere that needs to be left on. Are there room friendly server options that use Roon upsampling that sound as good?

 

[Carlos269]

My problem with DACs that require HQPlayer is I don't want a PC in my room or elsewhere that needs to be left on. Are there room friendly server options that use Roon upsampling that sound as good?

Nothing sounds as good as HQPLAYER. The ROON transcoding to DSD is not close in sound quality, nothing is.

The PC does not need to be in the same room nor on all the time. With the use of an NAA that supports HQPLAYER the presence/footprint in your listening room can be tiny. Have a look at the size of the Sonore microRendu for example. Everything else needed can be elsewhere as long as the NAA is on the same network.

 

[Tuckers]

There is probably more voodoo involved with digital solutions than there are with analog.

I strongly disagree with this. Taking Vinyl as an example, the amount of tweaking and fiddling (which most Vinylphiles don't recognize as such) to get to personal nirvana far outstrips digital. Examples: Every cartridge has a distinctive sound that only the advanced wizards know intimately (which obviously diverges from reality) and needs to be matched to the table and arm. What type of screws work best with that arm and cartridge, should you use some kind of interface between cartridge body and arm? How tight should the screws be? The arm is made of of how many materials that need to balance out to provide just the right compliance etc., VTA, azimuth? Which turntable mat? or no mat? Record weights? Is the turntable suspension good enough on its own or do you need additional isolation chosen for the tonal effect that works best with the system? Record cleaners?

I don't bring this up to bring down analog, I love great vinyl systems and find them extremely satisfying to listen to. But it is myopathy to harp on digital for being complex and unsatisfyling. The main reason I haven't spun up my analog system and brought it up to current standards is because I would need to address 150 issues like those mentioned above to be satisfied that I am getting the best sound it is capable of, and it would ultimately take maybe 1000 hours of my time and an enourmous outlay to do it properly. And I could only do it this way if I was to approach it.

 

[hopkins]

I had an interesting convo with the reviewer of the T+A DAC200 that you, oddly IMO, accused of being biased by measurements.

He claims NO PCM DAC CAN PROPERLY CONVERT DIGITAL TO ANALOG

We are all biased in some ways.

As far as his claims go, more power to him if he thinks this is the solution, but I don't see how his point of view has any more validity than any one else's. He's just one guy who has listened to a few DACs and played around with a scope....

 

[hopkins]

I strongly disagree with this. Taking Vinyl as an example, the amount of tweaking and fiddling (which most Vinylphiles don't recognize as such) to get to personal nirvana far outstrips digital. Examples: Every cartridge has a distinctive sound that only the advanced wizards know intimately (which obviously diverges from reality) and needs to be matched to the table and arm. What type of screws work best with that arm and cartridge, should you use some kind of interface between cartridge body and arm? How tight should the screws be? The arm is made of of how many materials that need to balance out to provide just the right compliance etc., VTA, azimuth? Which turntable mat? or no mat? Record weights? Is the turntable suspension good enough on its own or do you need additional isolation chosen for the tonal effect that works best with the system? Record cleaners?

I don't bring this up to bring down analog, I love great vinyl systems and find them extremely satisfying to listen to. But it is myopathy to harp on digital for being complex and unsatisfyling. The main reason I haven't spun up my analog system and brought it up to current standards is because I would need to address 150 issues like those mentioned above to be satisfied that I am getting the best sound it is capable of, and it would ultimately take maybe 1000 hours of my time and an enourmous outlay to do it properly. And I could only do it this way if I was to approach it.

You will find mad tweakers in any area of this hobby (I personally enjoy tweaking, though ultimately my setup is simple both for analog and digital - I enjoy both...).

To make my point clearer, when it comes to vinyl, I don't think anyone disputes the "fundamentals": to get a more accurate signal out of a vinyl, you need to pay attention to the quality of the media (i.e. cleaning records), you need constant replay speed, low vibration, pay attention to cartridges, etc...

I don't see anyone challenging others to a blind test between a 100$ turntable and a 10.000$ turntable (random number).

With digital, it seems that there are no "fundamentals". Its all fair game.

 

[Joe Whip]

I realize this was somewhat of a caricature. But you can see from Jay's audio lab's video that it does apply to some - not a small number, IMO.

I can’t say that Jay persuades me about anything.

 

[hopkins]

I can’t say that Jay persuades me about anything.

That was not the point.

 

[PeterA]

Jay is keeping it real, Guys.

 

[andromedaaudio]

If Jay hasnt tried a rockport or kharma in the coming year im gonna unsubscribe.

He called us WBF minions after all lol

 

[AudioGod]

If Jay hasnt tried a rockport or kharma in the coming year im gonna unsubscribe.

He called us WBF minions after all lol

His $350K Wilsons aren't enough ?

 

[hopkins]

Jay is keeping it real, Guys.

He's getting over his mid-life crisis

 

[andromedaaudio]

His $350K Wilsons aren't enough ?

No, Rp lyra kharma exquisite is a league above.
Price is irrelevant its about coherency / transparancy