Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[hopkins]

And since most masters are digital

If you only listen to contemporary recordings.

 

[AudioGod]

If you only listen to contemporary recordings.

Even if you listen to old music ,digital is still better Becaue like I said , it's indistinguishable from the master,digital or analog

 

[hopkins]

Even if you listen to old music ,digital is still better Becaue like I said , it's indistinguishable from the master,digital or analog

Yawn...

 

[AudioGod]

Yawn...

Yeah , sorry that facts and science are boring ...

 

[hopkins]

Yeah , sorry that facts and science are boring ...

Just let it go. Enjoy whatever music you care to listen to.

 

[dcathro]

Even if you listen to old music ,digital is still better Becaue like I said , it's indistinguishable from the master,digital or analog

AudioGod,

Honestly mate, you are embarrassing yourself! Give it a rest!

I use digital (CDs) as my source and will argue all day that, with the right recordings/masterings/pressings, it can be an incredibly satisfying medium, but your campaign is just silly and annoying.

I have heard both vinyl and tape replay that is also incredibly good.

 

[bonzo75]

AudioGod,

Honestly mate, you are embarrassing yourself! Give it a rest!

why do you then keep replying to him

 

[Tangram]

I thought the original question was interesting. I also thought the thread would avoid the typical analog vs. digital nonsense that we see time and again on forums frequented by less enlightened members of the audiophile community.

 

[dcathro]

why do you then keep replying to him

I haven't, this is my first reply to him!

Why are you picking on me? LOL

 

[AudioGod]

I don't get the criticism somehow
This whole thread's purpose is to compare digital to vinyl and vice versa.

 

[Another Johnson]

audiogod presents as the reincarnation of Julian Hirsch … obviously the Pioneer amp is indisputably better than the Audio Research amp because its specifications are better. Listening tests? Who needs them. We have the measurements.

And I am not in either camp. Both “are what they are.”

 

[bonzo75]

I haven't, this is my first reply to him!

Why are you picking on me? LOL

not on you, on him

 

[dcathro]

I don't get the criticism somehow
This whole thread's purpose is to compare digital to vinyl and vice versa.

There is purpose in debate, but repeating the same tired specifications over and over again serves no purpose
I don't think there is a single member who is not aware of the supposed perfection of digital audio and it's technical superiority over analog.

However, many of us have found that digital rarely lives up to it's promise.

I will argue that digital is actually more fragile (easier to make sound bad) than analog, but with the proper care it can sound wonderful

 

[Tangram]

I don't get the criticism somehow
This whole thread's purpose is to compare digital to vinyl and vice versa.

Without discussing the value proposition, the original question isn’t being addressed.

 

[Porsche]

good Lord, some of you crack me up, defending your stance to others. if you prefer digital over analog great, and vice versa. I have Burmester for both, I have compared them with same music material, I love my streamer, its easy, opens me up to a ton of sound I cannot or do not have on vinyl, however, since comparing them I have used my TT probably 75-85% of the time over the streamer, to each there own, for the record my streamer and tt is about the same price, within a few grand

 

[wil]

That is quite a contrast. The cheap vinyl sounds much better to me at least. The problem is that the systems and rooms and set up are so different that it is hard to make any conclusions about vinyl vs. digital from these two examples. But yes, no contest here.

Interesting, I just listened to these two. The “cheap vinyl“ as Peter puts it, sounds awful to me. Harsh and aggressive. Sounds like bad digital. The room recording, with all its disadvantages, sounds much better to me..

The Qobuz Version posted it here is also horrendous! Obviously a terrible mastering.

 

[thedudeabides]

Wow. So many of you have never heard a great tape or vinyl playback system, that is SAD.
There is NO hiss and NO background noise of any kind with a great turntable, and I imagine with a top tire R2R.
Go to a show - at least - and listen to an SAT/AF0/1/Nagra TT.

I hear tape hiss on many of 1960 classical and jazz CD's. And it's part of the original recording and not a system noise artifact. For example, try the early Miles mono recordings or the Mercury Living Presence CD's. If you do not hear it on the vinyl version, I would question the accuracy of the system.

 

[Porsche]

I have never been to a concert in my life that was dead quite, zero noise, that's part of the enjoyment with analog

 

[thedudeabides]

However, all of us have found that digital rarely lives up to it's prgeneralization.

Who is "all of us"? An extremely flawed generalization.

 

[chuck]

What is their metric or criteria for "superior," "best" and "best quality"?

In the ways that matter, resolution, dynamic range, how close to the actual performance that they just recorded etc. etc. They discussed it at length. I suggest you interview them yourself in a YT video.

Michael Fremer and Robin Wyatt just produced and released a digitally recorded album, "Rufus Reid Presents Caelan Cardello," on both vinyl and CD, mastered by Bob Ludwig. Mr. Fremer said the sound was a "10". It was a recording of a live performance that Mr. Fremer attended.