Digital is getting more exciting every year, getting closer to ... live music.
Paul McGowan Prefers Digital
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
Even one of the most vocal digital nay-sayers, Fremer, has had a gradual turnaround in recent years. Likely not that he has "changed his mind", but that digital is just getting better. He recently gave an "11" in SQ to a vinyl that was sourced from hi-rez digital. And the last several vinyl reviews he doesn't even bother to say if the disc was cut from analog tape or digital file.
Your digital and analog are at approximately the same very high end price point. I'd love to see this comparison done at the <=$20k price point, I bet it would be reverse results... ;-)
Can I ask you a question - If he said he preferred vinyl would you still be questioning his preference?
If Paul wrote that he preferred vinyl for convenience or practicality, then I would be questioning his preference.
If Paul wrote that he preferred vinyl for sound quality, then I would not be questioning his preference, because it is consistent with my preference about sound quality.
Unfortunately many analogers have too much money tied up in their analog equipment, which limits their willingness to accept they can get better sound from digital at half the cost of their analog investment.
I am happy for y’all!
There is no way to prove you wrong (about sound quality). It is more than enough for me to know myself that you are wrong.
Was it you or was it somebody else who posted correctly on this thread that there is no “right” or “wrong” in this hobby, only subjective preference?
But if you really want to save money buy a Mara or a Sonorus or a UHA open reel tape machine and get better sound quality!
Last edited:
well....er....not all analogers.
some of us tried the 'half-way' digital investment and it did not measure up nearly as well as when we went full tilt boggie with the digital investment. but even then, analog is better.
analog does set the bar very high. and half way.....is....half way.
Last edited:
How much is a full tilt SOTA analog vinyl setup cost vs digital?
100 pct vs 20 pct or less....
Remember the killer in this hobby is the last 2 pct.
100 pct vs 20 pct or less....
Remember the killer in this hobby is the last 2 pct.
it depends on your expectations.
let's say you invest $50k-$75k in your vinyl source gear. the same spent on digital would fall short with the optimal vinyl media. but that spent on digital would get you close enough that other digital advantages of ease of use and access to media would maybe equate to a better life fit.
but just on the performance side of things above a certain point of vinyl investment no amount of money spent on digital is going to look the best vinyl fully in the eye.
but not all would agree. just how it looks from my perspective as one who has tried to get digital as close as possible without limits.
and this has nothing to do with the last 2 percent. other than room optimization might only represent 2% of your investment but might make worlds of difference in performance assuming the room is fundamentally sound to begin with. but with gear, unfortunately....2%....is merely...2%. no free stuff. not to say that certain types of gear can be great at relatively lower cost than other types. some speaker brands can transcend 5x as expensive other brands but maybe be more narrowly successful. price is not always a good measure of things, but mostly it is.
Last edited:
I disagree but we both have opinions with different skills and experiences.
Digital has or will equal analog, the technology was always present...understanding what effects digital negatively just needs to catch up. That’s my opinion and experience....I know people won’t agree.
Btw I think 200k on a SOTA vinyl setup is closer to reality.
follow the money. there is no economic driver to make that happen. unless it's a byproduct of advances in electronic gaming or another tech industry. certainly the music industry has zero interest in that. consumers are not asking for it. current hirez formats have been in place for 20 years now, and nothing new is on the horizon.
you can spend as much as you want on vinyl, no doubt. but at $75k intelligently spent, vinyl easily rises above any digital when playing the better pressings. and at $100k the gap gets wider......and so on.
YMMV, just my 2 cents.
WRT point #1 - I think you're looking at it the wrong way - I'd say follow the $ from the trickle down effect of design engineering. Companies like MSB, TotalDAC and Aries Cerat who are making quite high end DACs but likely make more $ off the less expensive models. Couple that with the high - end audiophile $ ceiling continually rising and the market for high end designs is there. If you're insinuating the source material / process is inferior WRT digital, I'd refer you to a majority sentiment about early CDs and so called "digititis" which turned out to be not nearly as bad as once thought - it wasn't the source, mastering or format, it was the converters.
WRT point #2 - I agree however most audiophiles (including on WBF) aren't remotely at this level. With that said, ask yourself, for the majority of us who spend ~$500 - ~$20K on a source which sounds better? What's the higher value add for the majority? ;-)
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
what if you have the actual digital equipment that made the recording or master... it can't get better than that.....
Last edited:
I'm in the early stages of a "refresh" of a multi zone home audio system for a client (15yo system). It's mostly obsolete; but not because digital source has changed much. The control side has. And the hardware that implements it. Of course we seem to be in a growth period for good quality digital over ip, will be fun to see how far it goes.
(Yes I'm an analog guy but ya gotta do some digital these days
(Yes I'm an analog guy but ya gotta do some digital these days
Similar threads
