Great article on "Analogue Warmth"

[PeterA]

I've never claimed to have heard the best digital available. I'm just saying the best digital available hasn't hit the market yet. And it's far better than all the guys on here who are slamming digital have ever heard.

If the best digital has not hit the market yet, how can you claim that it is available? Do you mean "by available" that it exists but that no one can buy it?

If you have not heard the best digital available, how can you claim that it is far better than all the guys on here who are slamming digital have ever heard?

 

[PeterA]

Lots of pro digital folks accept this as a given. It's been the analog people confusing their preferences as superior fidelity which make this an ongoing issue.

How about this: I prefer the analog that I have heard to the digital that I have heard because to my ears analog sounds more like what I hear at my favorite concert hall.

This may change fully once the latest generation of digital is released and available to the public. I just have not heard that yet. I look forward to one day hearing a format that BOTH sounds like what I hear live AND what more accurately reproduces what is on the recording. I have no doubt that we will someday reach that point, but I think much in the recording process will also have to change.

 

[Blizzard]

If the best digital has not hit the market yet, how can you claim that it is available? Do you mean "by available" that it exists but that no one can buy it?

If you have not heard the best digital available, how can you claim that it is far better than all the guys on here who are slamming digital have ever heard?

It's available, just not for sale on the market yet. We will see some products launched at CES, then at Munich, and again at RMAF. It takes a while after technology is developed before we see finished products utilizing it.

 

[Ron Party]

Well, I've heard both formats in what some here would consider SOTA in the same system, many times. Many. Would I be willing to state one format is necessarily the superior format? No. Sorry. Hell no. They are just different. Different. Different sound. Different. Never even close to real, natural (LOL) or any of the other at best vague but at worst gibberish jargon commonly used. Different. Never even close to allowing me to suspend disbelief.

Does my opinion count? If so, why? What difference does one person's opinion make? What difference do ten person's opinions make? When does opinion, a preference, become more than that and instead become fact? Is my opinion falsifiable? If it is, then isn't it necessarily the case that no one can disagree, that it stands on its own, just like 2+2=4?

Yep, Groundhog Day at WBF. New day, same day.

Get up, stand up, seek love, peace and maybe even a college bowl game, anything. Heck, go listen to that all time Debby Boone classic, "You Light Up My Life", or Paul Anka's "(You're) Having My Baby". LOL. Even that would be better than the dish of embarrassment being served up 'round here.

Oh, and look in the mirror, because that is where you'll find the tip of your own nose. It's not in your wallet. It's not in the sweet spot. It's not at your dealer's shop. Find it. Appreciate it. And show some humility, honesty and respect that it's the tip of your own nose, not everyone's, and most certainly not mine.

 

[Blizzard]

One thing I can say for sure that nobody can argue about is, digital and class D is going to continue to get better and better every year for a long time. Vinyl and tube amps pretty much peaked years ago.

 

[bonzo75]

One thing I can say for sure that nobody can argue about is, digital and class D is going to continue to get better and better every year for a long time. Vinyl and tube amps pretty much peaked years ago.

After the start of the race, you need to keep running. Vinyl and tubes reached end of the marathon finish line years ago

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

One thing I can say for sure that nobody can argue about is, digital and class D is going to continue to get better and better every year for a long time. Vinyl and tube amps pretty much peaked years ago.

 

[steve williams]

One thing I can say for sure that nobody can argue about is, digital and class D is going to continue to get better and better every year for a long time. Vinyl and tube amps pretty much peaked years ago.

I completely agree Mike and hopefully that'll be the answer for everyone

Happy New Year Ron. You have discussed your different flavor idea here for as long as I've known you and I can't disagree. What I think members are saying is that for their ears analog sounds better. As I read your inferences would your mind be put at ease if that is what they say otherwise truly Ron you have posted very much the same comments here and your anger is bubbling over. As you say Ron peace love and listen to music

Again a very Happy New Year

 

[Blizzard]

After the start of the race, you need to keep running. Vinyl and tubes reached end of the marathon finish line years ago

And soon a slim little efficient inexpensive box will be able to produce everything you love about your vinyl and tube with perfection. You are going to be so thrilled when you hear this level of digital that you will sell off all of your stuff. We are going to see a pile of deals on Audiogon soon. That's all I can say

 

[esldude]

How about this: I prefer the analog that I have heard to the digital that I have heard because to my ears analog sounds more like what I hear at my favorite concert hall.

This may change fully once the latest generation of digital is released and available to the public. I just have not heard that yet. I look forward to one day hearing a format that BOTH sounds like what I hear live AND what more accurately reproduces what is on the recording. I have no doubt that we will someday reach that point, but I think much in the recording process will also have to change.

This puts you right back to square one with the problem. You are assuming digital has some hidden distortion that is preventing the recording from sounding like what you hear live. If it is already transparent to the recording, and analog sounds more like what you hear in a concert hall, analog sounds that way due to it coloring the sound to your liking. In that case there is no improvement that will make it sound both more like the recording and more like what you hear live. The two aren't the same.

What you are getting with analog is a sort of processing of the recorded signal to enhance it in ways to make sound more like live music in a concert hall. Until you understand that you can't get anywhere with a more accurate medium. It will always sound less like what you are wanting to hear unless you process it also. Once you do understand that fact, you can turn your attention to what sort of processing makes it sound more real to me? That might be different recording techniques or straightforward signal processing.

This shouldn't be surprising. Alan Blumlein had stereo worked out long ago. You can duplicate his techniques and they are as far as the frontal perspective goes relatively accurate upon reproduction. There are inherent limitations to stereo reproduction that prevent it from sounding like the concert hall precisely. There are some processes that can let it sound something more similar to the live hall sound. These aren't fidelity to the source though they serve as a stand in for fidelity to the experience. This is why less than 1% of commercial recordings are done with 2 mics and no processing.

 

[Rodney Gold]

I stick on a pristine modern DDD recording of some music.. sounds amazing , then I stick on 60's recording of ella and Louis , hiss ,mic distortion , rolled off treble , limited bass and all .. and I feel closer to the music and the performers with the "compromised" recording...dunno why...

 

[Blizzard]

How about this: I prefer the analog that I have heard to the digital that I have heard because to my ears analog sounds more like what I hear at my favorite concert hall.

This may change fully once the latest generation of digital is released and available to the public. I just have not heard that yet. I look forward to one day hearing a format that BOTH sounds like what I hear live AND what more accurately reproduces what is on the recording. I have no doubt that we will someday reach that point, but I think much in the recording process will also have to change.

I do agree that the biggest shortcomings today with digital lie at the studio. This is why I support companies like Merging. They are trying their best to change that. They have real solutions.

 

[DaveyF]

And soon a slim little efficient inexpensive box will be able to produce everything you love about your vinyl and tube with perfection. You are going to be so thrilled when you hear this level of digital that you will sell off all of your stuff. We are going to see a pile of deals on Audiogon soon. That's all I can say

Many years ago in the pro audio world, there was a device that was brought to market called an 'amp modeler'. Essentially this digital device was capable of 'modeling' the sound of classic amps, pedals, cabinets and halls that were well known and respected in the industry.
Many people bought into these devices ( including myself) and they have been "upgraded' throughout the years....each and very year the amp modelers are 'supposedly' better. Better able to sound more exactly alike to the amp or pedal or combo that they are trying to emulate/model.
Now, ask me how many pro musicians are still so enamored of these devices and have considered trading in their classic tube amps for them...

 

[Gregadd]

1+1 = 2. What is the problem in that? And what is there to admit? If you believe there is a problem, you need to demonstrate it using factual matters that can be verified. Otherwise we will be chasing ghosts.

Many lose ends in digital audio have been research. There is none whatsoever that points to edginess, lack of warmth, no microdetails, or whatever other subjective terms we like to use. Doctors don't go chase what patients say they need to do. They research what their peers accept as being real things to discover and cure. Why do we expect audio to work the other way around?


Choose whatever method you want. But it has to be acceptable to the scientific and engineering community to take seriously and put resources to fix things.


I didn't quote Ethan. I said he created a test with 10 generations of A/D and D/A. If you are right that you can easily tell the first generation, then 10th generation must be a walk in the park. I took the test. It required all of my attention and training to find the artifacts. I am confident vast majority of audiophiles can't tell those distortions or we would have inundated him with our positive results.

At some point we need to be honest with ourselves and accept what I said: that we have not in any form or fashion have been able to demonstrate in any acceptable way to the scientific community that digital has the problems we say it has. Yet we keep asking them to bend, or "admit there is a problem" as you say. How about we admit that our case may not hold water. How about that? Are you willing to admit that Greg? Or do you ask the other side what you won't do?

I am omly responding to this because my name is mentioned. Pardon me be for not responding pont by point. We have had all these discussions before to no avail as I noted ealrier.
I have but one obligation, If I may parapharse the quotation, "To thine own self be true" -To thine own ears be true. Accepting digital as flawless would violate that. I began this episode by saying no one shoud accept an amplifier(or any device for that matter) that consisttently sounded "cold and sterile." To me that should be self evident. It seemd to me that some were making a pretty determined argunent in the other direction. I felt the need to speak out. I'll ust make this point again There is no audio standard that requires that. A device that consistently sounds that way is incompetent or malfunctioning.
I then contrasted the distortions of tube vinyl vs solid state digital. The entire audiophile field is devoted to deciphering and solving the preblems of anlogue. To claim they are ignored by the high end is simply untrue.
I for one lack the technical expertise to analyze digital. Nor as I stated in a thead entitled DigitalPrimer am I so nclined to do so. For the most digital is take it or leave it propositionfor the end user.The gospel for me is that mehthodolgy is only part of the answer. I may not be ample to build a device or make a recording. There is te thing can do listen. In fact how a device or source sounds is in the ende the intended result.
I'm sure you know I don't accept blind test chaleenges. Least of all one designed by Ethan. I had my issues with the test. He's not here to defnd himsAelf. In any event we already discussed my approach to Ethan;s test on the threat Tips for ABX.I do not accpt blind challenges. I listen sited for long terms.I no longer do A/B compayisons. Even if I cinsneted what would the outcome of a committee of one matter?
I do not know why digital sounds the way it does. It is a highly technical endeavor. Listening is fairly easy. Furthermore I never said I could pick out a first generation of digital.I said the problems of digital would be appaerent in the orignl copy. I have no idea whether they would be cumularive.

 

[microstrip]

One thing I can say for sure that nobody can argue about is, digital and class D is going to continue to get better and better every year for a long time.

I hope so. They still have a lot to improve. And you are promising us lots of good thinks for 2020.

Vinyl and tube amps pretty much peaked years ago.

I disagree. Current top vinyl playing systems and tube amps are significantly better than those from ten (or even five) years ago.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim,

I respect where you are coming from.....I 'can' fully enjoy music in any form, context, or way it's presented to me. even when I hear a good tune on the 'Musak' over our company PA system, or the over the radio in the car with the top down. the clock radio in my bedroom can sound good to me. I am not a music snob.

but as an audiophile there are times when I want to hear music sound as good as possible. in these cases it's all about expectations, priorities, and references.

let's say it was important enough to you to spend the time investigating how great redbook could sound. after you put the effort into discovering what the possibilities might be and heard the best possible reference, would your expectations change? would hearing it the best possible way be important? would the difference between where you are at and the very best be sufficient to justify you improving what you now hear?

after reading your viewpoints for 5 years I doubt it's really that important to you. and if you don't care enough to investigate, the posts in this thread talking about PCM nasties are beside the point to you. you are satisfied where you are.

nothing wrong with that.

I am pretty satisfied with where I'm at, and I consider that a very good thing. But that's not the point here at all. One man's clarity and detail may be another man's too bright; one's "timbral density" may be another's colored midrange, but if you read these forums with any objectivity at all, it becomes clear that there are characteristic qualities of digital and analog that don't require reaching to the pinnacle of the state of the art, much less having it in your home, to decide what you prefer. I respect your experience with gear, I just don't respect this particular argument. Mep used to make it all the time, and while you do it with much more tact and dignity, it's still a get out of jail free card. I don't have a SOTA system of any kind, but I've heard real, live, acoustic instruments, a lot, in every listening room I've ever had, so if an "original event" is a reference, I could dismiss pretty much everyone's opinion here based on the same logic. I don't, because it's faulty logic.

Tim

 

[Blizzard]

I stick on a pristine modern DDD recording of some music.. sounds amazing , then I stick on 60's recording of ella and Louis , hiss ,mic distortion , rolled off treble , limited bass and all .. and I feel closer to the music and the performers with the "compromised" recording...dunno why...

Very simple gear was used at the recording studio at the time. Have you listened to any of the latest quad DSD stuff?

 

[thedudeabides]

Well gentlemen,

We are averaging about one post per every ten minutes for seven days and counting.

Astounding. Has anyone "won" yet?

 

[Blizzard]

Many years ago in the pro audio world, there was a device that was brought to market called an 'amp modeler'. Essentially this digital device was capable of 'modeling' the sound of classic amps, pedals, cabinets and halls that were well known and respected in the industry.
Many people bought into these devices ( including myself) and they have been "upgraded' throughout the years....each and very year the amp modelers are 'supposedly' better. Better able to sound more exactly alike to the amp or pedal or combo that they are trying to emulate/model.
Now, ask me how many pro musicians are still so enamored of these devices and have considered trading in their classic tube amps for them...

Even the latest and greatest studio emulation software and hardware isn't that great, let alone stuff from years ago.

 

[esldude]

I am omly responding to this because my name is mentioned. Pardon me be for not responding pont by point. We have had all these discussions before to no avail as I noted ealrier.
I have but one obligation, If I may parapharse the quotation, "To thine own self be true" -To thine own ears be true. Accepting digital as flawless would violate that. I began this episode by saying no one shoud accept an amplifier(or any device for that matter) that consisttently sounded "cold and sterile." To me that should be self evident. It seemd to me that some were making a pretty determined argunent in the other direction. I felt the need to speak out. I'll ust make this point again There is no audio standard that requires that. A device that consistently sounds that way is incompetent or malfunctioning.
I then contrasted the distortions of tube vinyl vs solid state digital. The entire audiophile field is devoted to deciphering and solving the preblems of anlogue. To claim they are ignored by the high end is simply untrue.
I for one lack the technical expertise to analyze digital. Nor as I stated in a thead entitled DigitalPrimer am I so nclined to do so. For the most digital is take it or leave it propositionfor the end user.The gospel for me is that mehthodolgy is only part of the answer. I may not be ample to build a device or make a recording. There is te thing can do listen. In fact how a device or source sounds is in the ende the intended result.
I'm sure you know I don't accept blind test chaleenges. Least of all one designed by Ethan. I had my issues with the test. He's not here to defnd himsAelf. In any event we already discussed my approach to Ethan;s test on the threat Tips for ABX.I do not accpt blind challenges. I listen sited for long terms.I no longer do A/B compayisons. Even if I cinsneted what would the outcome of a committee of one matter?
I do not know why digital sounds the way it does. It is a highly technical endeavor. Listening is fairly easy. Furthermore I never said I could pick out a first generation of digital.I said the problems of digital would be appaerent in the orignl copy. I have no idea whether they would be cumularive.

A summary of your approach is here regarding the streetlight effect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetlight_effect

I am not trying to be insulting, and I understand your position I think in that you have only the listening end to judge by. That is fine, but elevating your opinion vs those who have or are able to do a more thorough investigation by entrenched disagreement seems unhelpful at least.