Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[Mike Lavigne]

What do you mean by - idea oriented - listening oriented -system oriented?

idea oriented----bringing a perspective or agenda, a point to be made, a position. opinions. this is good, this is bad. here is why. here are the facts. people do this, people do that. digital is better. it's all placebo. blind testing. audiophiles suffer from delusions. here is what we measured. all solid state is good/bad. analog lovers are misguided. did you get your hearing tested? newbies do this. audiophiles are getting too old.

listening oriented---i heard this, i enjoyed this. this sounds like. when i played this here is what i heard. this is why i love rock. i love classical. this symphony hall sounded like this. i love live music. my listening reference is X. this recording was great. here is a list of what we listened to.

system oriented----this is my gear, i want to know about gear. what should i buy. here is my room, how can i make my system/room sound better. what did you hear from that tt, arm, dac, preamp, amp, speaker, cable? horns are better. tubes are better.

combining all three is what we all are most comfortable with. and long term those that combine all three carry the most weight here. we need ideas and need some questioning of what we think, but we need to be grounded in listening and developing our systems for the best performance. that should be the foundation of the discourse. which has nothing to do with dollars or even having a system. it's a state of mind of shared pursuit of the best music reproduction experience.

if you never talk about what you heard, or your system or intended system, then your ideas are not too relevant over time. why are you here?

 

[bonzo75]

Here you are describing macro sonic attributes, not detail.



Why not describe this merely as detail?

Separation of instruments is a macro attribute and detail but not inner detail. Why describe it that way? For example, I find Lyra to have details, but not the same inner details as vdh, Dava, or red sparrow on vyger. I find koetsu to be not detailed.

i find big SS amps capable of having details, but not the inner details of good sets based systems.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

idea oriented----bringing a perspective or agenda, a point to be made, a position. opinions. this is good, this is bad. here is why. here are the facts. people do this, people do that. digital is better. it's all placebo. blind testing. audiophiles suffer from delusions. here is what we measured. all solid state is good/bad. analog lovers are misguided. did you get your hearing tested? newbies do this. audiophiles are getting too old.

listening oriented---i heard this, i enjoyed this. this sounds like. when i played this here is what i heard. this is why i love rock. i love classical. this symphony hall sounded like this. i love live music. my listening reference is X. this recording was great. here is a list of what we listened to.

system oriented----this is my gear, i want to know about gear. what should i buy. here is my room, how can i make my system/room sound better. what did you hear from that tt, arm, dac, preamp, amp, speaker, cable? horns are better. tubes are better.

combining all three is what we all are most comfortable with. and long term those that combine all three carry the most weight here. we need ideas and need some questioning of what we think, but we need to be grounded in listening and developing our systems for the best performance. that should be the foundation of the discourse. which has nothing to do with dollars or even having a system. it's a state of mind of shared pursuit of the best music reproduction experience.

if you never talk about what you heard, or your system or intended system, then your ideas are not too relevant over time. why are you here?

Agree 100% On your summary here Mike. It truly is a combination of all 3 or better yet all 3 are a subset of being and audiophile. I often ask this question of some “why are you here?”

 

[ssfas]

My perception of a recording label is a machine focused on profits. Profits profits profits. Screw the artist and performers. Profits.

I briefly came across the individual perceived these days as the most exploitative label owner at the very start of his career when he was at ground level trying to get a record label going with one or two artists (mainly Sinitta) and also selling hand-held translation machines and language tapes, arguing with other producers over artists, trying to make some money. It was interesting to observe as an outsider. He actually lost a lot of money. His boss also conned my cousin out of quite a lot of money (so he says). The experience probably drove him to be successful and create all those semi-exploitative TV shows (plenty of artists made a lot of money), which had been on Saturday Night TV for decades. The leading producer who he was having an argument with back in about 1990 became one of his first judges 15 years later, so clearly it was just business.

There have always been managers and producers that made a lot of money. Some of them have poor reputations, but their artists loved them because they made them a lot of money as well (I speak from personal experience). I came across a chap called Brian Lane years ago, one of the most engaging and amusing people you could meet. He managed rock bands, including YES. If you've ever read any of Rick Wakeman's hilarious books, he referred to him as "Deal-a-Day" Lane. Wakeman clearly loved him. The priorities were to make music, make money, get laid and have fun, in no particular order.

The head of UMG started off making the tea and going to gigs to find new bands. He was obviously good at it, he runs the largest record business in the world, but I'm reliably informed it still very much about the music and he's close to his leading artists. UMG bought DGG and Decca, so is a very big player in classical, close to my heart, and seems to be doing a really good job. They recently bought Hyperion, a small acquisition, but really good for the artists and customers alike. It's a sign that they really do care (no joke). UMG Classical is run by a friend of my wife, a young and energetic lady, it is apparently very artist driven, and they are now doing all these DGG Audiophile pressings, which are by all accounts very good and popular. I have a few on order!

There are some great independent labels out there, but often consolidation is the only means to survival. I know the head of licensing of one group of labels and he told me that these days the artists all have very fair contracts, not like the old days, because the revenue streams have changed so dramatically.

So there's my shout-out for record labels. Strangely, they seem to be run by people who like music.

 

[Ron Resnick]

My perception of a recording label is a machine focused on profits. Profits profits profits. Screw the artist and performers. Profits.

So recording companies are the only for-profit businesses not allowed by you to make a profit?

How many of the artists Clive Davis made rich and famous hate him for "screwing" them?

Many years ago when my father was Vice President of Business Administration for the Atlantic Records Group he introduced me to Craig Kallman, shortly after Doug Morris had Atlantic acquire Craig's Big Beat records. Today Craig is Chairman of Atlantic Records. He also is the highest ranking executive audiophile in the entire record business.

Craig started Big Beat when he was in college. Do you really believe Craig doesn't care about music or about artists?

 

[treitz3]

ASR claims exactly the same about hi end forums .

Their "claims" may shut them down for good. I'll just leave this there.

Time will tell.

Tom

 

[Zeotrope]

Their "claims" may shut them down for good. I'll just leave this there.

Time will tell.

Tom

I would love it if ASR is shut down - would love to know more. ASR is complete Garbage.
Their ”science” won’t pass muster in a grade school science class..

 

[treitz3]

I think it would be best if I keep quiet on this for the moment. This may or may not age well but something is brewing behind the scenes and it may come to a boiling point.

Tom

 

[AudioGod]

I think it would be best if I keep quiet on this for the moment. This may or may not age well but something is brewing behind the scenes and it may come to a boiling point.

Tom

You can't drop a bomb like that and not give us a clue

 

[treitz3]

He made his bed. Now he has to sleep in it. That's the last statement I will make on this subject.

Not one more word will be spoken by me about this. As mentioned, time will tell whether not this ages well.

Now, let's please get back to the topic of the thread...

Tom

 

[bonzo75]

some here are idea oriented, some are listening oriented, some are system oriented, some are all three.

Based on your definitions of these terms, those who believe videos are representative are listening oriented, and the disbelievers are idea oriented

 

[AudioGod]

Finally a vinyl I can enjoy

 

[AudioGod]

some here are idea oriented, some are listening oriented, some are system oriented, some are all three. i think the answer to your point is contained in how this forum's members approach the hobby. mostly they are serious listeners with active systems. the time listening and believing their ears is of greater weight in their perspective than any other data points. and so this forum respects listening mostly as opposed to some greater technical reasoning.

which does not mean we all agree, but it seems the listening does end up with most of us hearing similarly. not all, just most.

if someone enters the forum with mostly ideas, and not really any listening based perspectives, then they are going to be on the margin and not fit in fully. but that's ok, it's not required we all agree. but expecting to influence the forum with idea based reasoning is not realistic. what did you hear? how did you hear it? those are what most of us want to know. lacking that part will not get you far. but there is no problem with it.

if you tell us about some measurement based idea, it's just not going to get any traction. it carries zero weight here. if you have posted about your listening perspectives for a few years first, then maybe it might get some attention as something to look at. but that's just how it is. we are not looking to be educated about numbers. not why we come here. and outside data is just noise, to be ignored mostly.

And some are science oriented

 

[Mike Lavigne]

And some are science oriented

if it's not listening or system/gear then it's idea. science is a legit part of ideas. so i agree that it has it's place.....in the context. but "all" science this is the wrong place for it to get any attention. it will never be central. it's used when it fits into the bigger picture.

proof is never the goal.

 

[AudioGod]

if it's not listening or system/gear then it's idea. science is a legit part of ideas. so i agree that it has it's place.....in the context. but "all" science this is the wrong place for it to get any attention. it will never be central. it's used when it fits into the bigger picture.

proof is never the goal.

But everything else is science based
So why can't audio be like that too ?
Doctors treat you purely on science based knowledge , and not some mystical stuff .
If sound can be measured, not much else is left as an unknown .
Obviously a speaker could measure perfectly and you wouldn't like it's sound , but it will let you know that it's accurate at least.
So I'm like 90% objective , 10% subjective in this hobby.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

But everything else is science based
So why can't audio be like that too ?
Doctors treat you purely on science based knowledge , and not some mystical stuff .
If sound can be measured, not much else is left as an unknown .
Obviously a speaker could measure perfectly and you wouldn't like it's sound , but it will let you know that it's accurate at least.
So I'm like 90% objective , 10% subjective in this hobby.

it's art. ART. is art science based? no. artists apply science to some of their creations, and even some engineering and physics in some cases. but art is never judged based on science. it's a medium for the senses.

some may not see audio/hifi/music as art. but then they don't fully fit in here. you are free to look at music reproduction as science.

 

[hopkins]

But everything else is science based
So why can't audio be like that too ?
Doctors treat you purely on science based knowledge , and not some mystical stuff .
If sound can be measured, not much else is left as an unknown .
Obviously a speaker could measure perfectly and you wouldn't like it's sound , but it will let you know that it's accurate at least.
So I'm like 90% objective , 10% subjective in this hobby.

 

[AudioGod]

it's art. ART. is art science based? no. artists apply science to some of their creations, and even some engineering and physics in some cases. but art is never judged based on science. it's a medium for the senses.

some may not see audio/hifi/music as art. but then they don't fully fit in here. you are free to look at music reproduction as science.

The music itself is art and cannot be measured or explained .
The electronics / speakers playing back the recorded music are instruments
And that's why they can be measured like everything else on the planet
I'm fact science based audio gear almost always have better feedback from listeners than something that was developed using one man's "golden ears" .

 

[Al M.]

But everything else is science based
So why can't audio be like that too ?
Doctors treat you purely on science based knowledge , and not some mystical stuff .
If sound can be measured, not much else is left as an unknown .
Obviously a speaker could measure perfectly and you wouldn't like it's sound , but it will let you know that it's accurate at least.
So I'm like 90% objective , 10% subjective in this hobby.

Except that you have an incredibly naive and gullible view of science. Here a quote of my post from another thread (Robert Harley's Wonderful Defense of our Subjective Hobby):

Great defense. I am a scientist myself, but I am all for subjective evaluation as well.

Some, not all, engineers have a cocky attitude: they believe everything that needs to be measured can be measured, and we know exactly what to measure, all falsely in the name of "science". That's not how a scientist thinks.

A scientist knows that the more we know, the more we know that we don't know everything. If there is a discrepancy between what we are hearing and a measurement, it is not necessarily because the measurement is more "scientific". It could be that what we measure is simply flawed. Just like the first digital engineers did not know the incredible psychoacoustic impact of digital jitter (in the parts per billion) and proclaimed digital measures ("and sounds") perfect. A little humility is advised (see also Robert Harley's example about interface jitter in his essay). We don't know everything, and the digital engineers back then certainly didn't (fortunately we now know much more about jitter and how to manage it). Same thing holds for phenomena that we do still hear today but cannot quite measure yet, or if we can, not always do.

Fortunately there are enough engineers that are actually science-minded. Not all are. The cocky ones are on the ASR forum and the like, and spew their unscientific nonsense in the name of "science".

There is enough evidence that it s still best to trust our ears as the final arbiter.

Yes, measurements are useful, and no professional audio designer can live without them. But they are not always the Last Word.

 

[AudioGod]

Except that you have an incredibly naive and gullible view of science. Here a quote of my post from another thread (Robert Harley's Wonderful Defense of our Subjective Hobby):

I come from ASR