Too Late For Analog?

[Ron Party]

Respect is in the eyes and ears of the beholder. If that is what is takes to earn your respect, so be it. But please, Mike, you know well and good there are a lot of perfectly legitimate reasons why one might prefer to use an on line user name.

And *spouting off* stuff? I guess that also is in the eyes and ears of the beholder. One man's spout is another's poetry.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Respect is in the eyes and ears of the beholder. If that is what is takes to earn your respect, so be it. But please, Mike, you know well and good there are a lot of perfectly legitimate reasons why one might prefer to use an on line user name.

And *spouting off* stuff? I guess that also is in the eyes and ears of the beholder. One man's spout is another's poetry.

agree completely; i speak only for myself.

numerous posts asked -P- for specifics which he chose not to (or was not able to) divulge. at that point his anonyomous moniker becomes an issue. i think his 'cred' is then open to question. again---Bluster needs to be equaled by transparency. avoid bluster; who cares who you are or the credibility you have? if that is wrong to you then we disagree.

those who are personally invested in very high end vinyl playback are understandably intolerant of unsupported claims of superiority of digital. if those claims don't get supported then the validity of the claims is going to be challenged. i don't expect someone who is not similarly invested to share that viewpoint. if any strong claims are not held to an accountability standard then the cred of the forum is diminished. which causes the most serious enthusiasts to find another spot to hang where accountabilitiy is more important. that would solve the conflict but is that the result we want?

opinions get challenged. answers are then judged. conculsions are offered. that is how it is.

 

[silviajulieta]

Raul,

I love your sign-off...."enjoy the music"! For what it's worth, regardless of what systems I have owned in the past, own currently and might own tomorrow.....like you I "enjoy the music".

John

Dear John: IMHO I think that the main target in or beloved audio " hobby " and the why's we take our time,money, effort, learn process, etc etc in our each one home audio system is to " Enjoy the Music ".

We are, at least I'm here not only to have a fun time and take the opportunity to " speak " and interchange/share experiences with other persons that understand the whole concept of audio/music ( many times we don't have the opportunity in our city to talk with no one about. ) but looking what can I learn that could help to improve the " Enjoy the Music ".

A good debate always is IMHO always a learning one opportunity.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

agree completely; i speak only for myself.

numerous posts asked -P- for specifics which he chose not to (or was not able to) divulge. at that point his anonyomous moniker becomes an issue. i think his 'cred' is then open to question. again---Bluster needs to be equaled by transparency. avoid bluster; who cares who you are or the credibility you have? if that is wrong to you then we disagree.

those who are personally invested in very high end vinyl playback are understandably intolerant of unsupported claims of superiority of digital. if those claims don't get supported then the validity of the claims is going to be challenged. i don't expect someone who is not similarly invested to share that viewpoint. if any strong claims are not held to an accountability standard then the cred of the forum is diminished. which causes the most serious enthusiasts to find another spot to hang where accountabilitiy is more important. that would solve the conflict but is that the result we want?

opinions get challenged. answers are then judged. conculsions are offered. that is how it is.

Mike, I'm honored to be off of your ignore list.

You asked me for details about my recent experience with vinyl and I gave them to you. You didn't think my experience was sufficient. I believe that's how I got on your ignore list. You want my personal history? I'm 59. I am retired from a career in marketing and brand development. I am also a semi-pro (I get paid but don't make my living from it) musician of 40 years. I sold hifi long ago in my youth and am doing a bit of it again now, as retirement doesn't suit me all that well. I spent many years in which all of my critical listening was done on headphones and I either had no speakers, or used them for background music only. When I tried to return to speakers I couldn't get around a subtle harshness in the midrange I heard, even in very good, very expensive speakers, that I do not hear either in my headphones or in the many active studio monitors I've been exposed to as a musician and producer of broadcast advertising. So that's what I listen to: Active monitor speakers, and, still, my headphone system. I listen to files on a hard drive, mostly ripped as lossless from my collection of cds.

My "claims" about the superiority of digital are based on two things: 1 - Listening. 2 - noise, distortion, dynamic range and frequency response. I've done a couple of quick searches for specs, but the figures, it seems, aren't that easy to find, probably because so few dispute that digital out performs vinyl by these metrics and no one serious is even gathering such data any more. If you're really interested, enjoy the search. I consider the burden of proof in your camp. You're the one who is claiming that an antiquated playback medium with obvious physical and sonic limitations out-performs SOTA. Or don't. We could just call it a difference of opinion and be done with it.

My real name and my location are none of you business, Mike. It's not something I care to put out there on any web site on the internet and while I hope all of you are good, reasonable, sane people, and I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, I'll await verification. If caution destroys my credibility, I guess you'll just have to put me back on your ignore list.

P

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike, I'm honored to be off of your ignore list.

You asked me for details about my recent experience with vinyl and I gave them to you. You didn't think my experience was sufficient. I believe that's how I got on your ignore list. You want my personal history? I'm 59. I am retired from a career in marketing and brand development. I am also a semi-pro (I get paid but don't make my living from it) musician of 40 years. I sold hifi long ago in my youth and am doing a bit of it again now, as retirement doesn't suit me all that well. I spent many years in which all of my critical listening was done on headphones and I either had no speakers, or used them for background music only. When I tried to return to speakers I couldn't get around a subtle harshness in the midrange I heard, even in very good, very expensive speakers, that I do not hear either in my headphones or in the many active studio monitors I've been exposed to as a musician and producer of broadcast advertising. So that's what I listen to: Active monitor speakers, and, still, my headphone system. I listen to files on a hard drive, mostly ripped as lossless from my collection of cds.

My "claims" about the superiority of digital are based on two things: 1 - Listening. 2 - noise, distortion, dynamic range and frequency response. I've done a couple of quick searches for specs, but the figures, it seems, aren't that easy to find, probably because so few dispute that digital out performs vinyl by these metrics and no one serious is even gathering such data any more. If you're really interested, enjoy the search. I consider the burden of proof in your camp. You're the one who is claiming that an antiquated playback medium with obvious physical and sonic limitations out-performs SOTA. Or don't. We could just call it a difference of opinion and be done with it.

My real name and my location are none of you business, Mike. It's not something I care to put out there on any web site on the internet and while I hope all of you are good, reasonable, sane people, and I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, I'll await verification. If caution destroys my credibility, I guess you'll just have to put me back on your ignore list.

P

-P-,

Thank you.

i'm getting a feel for where you are coming from. and it all fits.

the www is a wonderful thing. and if you goggle Phelonious Ponk, your web site, Grumpy Old Arts, comes up. i read thru it and enjoyed your writing style and upbeat attitude toward the enjoyment of music. i agree with much of your viewpoint toward how much better 'boomer' pop/rock is than the stuff they do today.

where we don't agree is on the 'Audiophools' section of your blog where you write basically the same stuff you've written here, but with even more bluster.

i see you currently you use an AVI ADM 9.1 active speaker system with direct digital input. you even have a connection with the AVI, the company. btw; i think small monitor speakers can sound very good.....especially for the investment involved.

i read over all the various parts of your website and see no mention of analog anywhere....which is my only issue anyway....and that is your supposed familiararity to high level vinyl performance. my claims have nothing to do with any objective proof; they are totally based on listening to SOTA vinyl. you claim to know about it; but nothing you have told us gets anywhere close to actually showing that to us. and your whole web site is devoid of this thing you claim to know about.

you seem to be a good guy in every way, i have nothing personal against you. i'm only asking you to back off on your claims of knowing about very high end vinyl playback performance. love your digital, worship it. i could care less. but if you say things about high end vinyl performance that you cannot back up then your credibility (on that particular issue) will continue to be challenged.

best,

Mike Lavigne

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

-P-,

Thank you.

i'm getting a feel for where you are coming from. and it all fits.

the www is a wonderful thing. and if you goggle Phelonious Ponk, your web site, Grumpy Old Arts, comes up. i read thru it and enjoyed your writing style and upbeat attitude toward the enjoyment of music. i agree with much of your viewpoint toward how much better 'boomer' pop/rock is than the stuff they do today.

where we don't agree is on the 'Audiophools' section of your blog where you write basically the same stuff you've written here, but with even more bluster.

i see you currently you use an AVI ADM 9.1 active speaker system with direct digital input. you even have a connection with the AVI, the company. btw; i think small monitor speakers can sound very good.....especially for the investment involved.

i read over all the various parts of your website and see no mention of analog anywhere....which is my only issue anyway....and that is your supposed familiararity to high level vinyl performance. my claims have nothing to do with any objective proof; they are totally based on listening to SOTA vinyl. you claim to know about it; but nothing you have told us gets anywhere close to actually showing that to us. and your whole web site is devoid of this thing you claim to know about.

you seem to be a good guy in every way, i have nothing personal against you. i'm only asking you to back off on your claims of knowing about very high end vinyl playback performance. love your digital, worship it. i could care less. but if you say things about high end vinyl performance that you cannot back up then your credibility (on that particular issue) will continue to be challenged.

best,

Mike Lavigne

You call it bluster, I call it dark humor . I understand that it probably isn't funny to many hardcore tweakers, but I think quite a few of them are pretty humorless. My connection to AVi is mostly friendship. I wrote a few web pages for them out of that, and admiration for their product. I have heard some very high-end vinyl, Mike, and while I wouldn't say it sounds no better than my old Thorens or my friend's old modded Technics, I still hear a characteristic sound in those rigs that doesn't quite work for me. And I still believe that vinyl, as a medium, is incapable of the low levels of noise and distortion and the high dynamic range of digital. I'm not even close to alone in that, but if living with whatever standard is SOTA vinyl by your estimation is what's required to be credible in your view, then I'll just have to be incredible instead! My friend's latest deck cost him 7 grand used. I believe it was over 20 grand new. I can buy a lot of credibility for that kind of money.

P

ON EDIT: I wish I could give you the names of the turntables I've heard, but I'm afraid I don't do well with retaining that which doesn't interest me. When I see my old mate, I will find out the name of that ungodly expensive rig of his. It is a beautiful thing, I'll give it that. Not the surreal sculpture that some of them are. It's name is a man's name. And very English-sounding. I'll let you know when I do.

ON EDIT 2: Is there a turntable named Simon Yorke? I think that's it.

 

[mep]

MIke-Thanks for digging up P's website. It pretty much told me all I needed to know about P. He admits to being cheap which would explain some things. The little article he wrote complete with a revisionist history of American audio I found to be disturbing on a number of levels. Many service men from the Vietnam era brought home top of the line separate components and integrated amps. Many also brought home R2R decks and top turntables of the day. They all didn't have to take leave and go to Japan to make these purchases either. Most were ordered from the PX catalog available to all service members serving outside CONUS.

You can put together a digital rig on the cheap, specially if you use cans instead of speakers and any 10 year old can plumb it up and get music to play. The same can't be said for analog which is part of the attraction for those with no analog set-up skills and tools, ten thumbs, tin ears, and an aversion to spending money on this hobby because everything sounds the same anyway so why bother. I get it.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

MIke-Thanks for digging up P's website. It pretty much told me all I needed to know about P. He admits to being cheap which would explain some things. The little article he wrote complete with a revisionist history of American audio I found to be disturbing on a number of levels. Many service men from the Vietnam era brought home top of the line separate components and integrated amps. Many also brought home R2R decks and top turntables of the day. They all didn't have to take leave and go to Japan to make these purchases either. Most were ordered from the PX catalog available to all service members serving outside CONUS.

You can put together a digital rig on the cheap, specially if you use cans instead of speakers and any 10 year old can plumb it up and get music to play. The same can't be said for analog which is part of the attraction for those with no analog set-up skills and tools, ten thumbs, tin ears, and an aversion to spending money on this hobby because everything sounds the same anyway so why bother. I get it.

mep, dude, that article was written for entertainment, mostly my own. It was certainly not meant to be a scholarly history of the effects of the Vietnam conflict on audio in America. Lighten up. I know guys came home with turntables, R2Rs and even some separates. I owned some of them. And by the way, my current speaker rig could probably be plugged up by a 5 year old with a bit of direction. Does complexity make it sound better? Let me answer that for you: No. The more wire the more resistors, the more capacitors, the more power supplies, the more opportunity for noise and distortion. Complexity is an enemy of fidelity. This is a long-established audio principle lost to the love of stacks of shiny boxes, but it's still true.

I don't know what you think you get, brother, but it's not me. You got a glimpse of a persona I put on for a blog site, nothing more.

P

 

[Gregadd]

Credibiltiy is elsuive.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Credibiltiy is elsuive.

On the web, where no one really knows anyone else, real credibility is almost impossible. I wouldn't spend much time fretting over it.

P

 

[Gregadd]

On the web, where no one really knows anyone else, real credibility is almost impossible. I wouldn't spend much time fretting over it.

P

Perhaps you should pay more attention to it. Credibility and respect are invaluable. Once loss they are very difficult to regain. Ironically I googled your system and think your approach to music reproduction would make for an interesting thread. I see nothing wrong with high rez downlaods and an all in one system. I can't imagine why you hide your name.

 

[Ron Party]

We have at least 2 moderators setting what IMO is a dangerous and disrespectful precedent, asking members to post their real names. For the good and future of the WBF, Steve, please close this thread.

 

[Gregadd]

Ron. Just too be clear I did not ask anyone to reveal their name. I merely stated I did not understand his decision not to. I though I was inviting him to start a thread discussing the system with which he clearly is enamoured.

 

[Steve williams]

Gentlemen, gentlemen and I am using the term loosely.

I just got back from a day in San Francisco where I saw Young Frankenstein with my family. it was a two act production but it seemed that when I got home and logged on Act 3 was being played out.

The constant bickering that slips from one thread to another here just won't be tolerated. This forum is based on polite discourse and I will say enough is enough

 

[Steve williams]

I am reopening this thread with the hope that some honest and topical dialog can occur as well as, out of fairness to my friend bflowers who started the thread.

I was going to open the other thread but for now let's see how this one goes

 

[silviajulieta]

You call it bluster, I call it dark humor . I understand that it probably isn't funny to many hardcore tweakers, but I think quite a few of them are pretty humorless. My connection to AVi is mostly friendship. I wrote a few web pages for them out of that, and admiration for their product. I have heard some very high-end vinyl, Mike, and while I wouldn't say it sounds no better than my old Thorens or my friend's old modded Technics, I still hear a characteristic sound in those rigs that doesn't quite work for me. And I still believe that vinyl, as a medium, is incapable of the low levels of noise and distortion and the high dynamic range of digital. I'm not even close to alone in that, but if living with whatever standard is SOTA vinyl by your estimation is what's required to be credible in your view, then I'll just have to be incredible instead! My friend's latest deck cost him 7 grand used. I believe it was over 20 grand new. I can buy a lot of credibility for that kind of money.

P

ON EDIT: I wish I could give you the names of the turntables I've heard, but I'm afraid I don't do well with retaining that which doesn't interest me. When I see my old mate, I will find out the name of that ungodly expensive rig of his. It is a beautiful thing, I'll give it that. Not the surreal sculpture that some of them are. It's name is a man's name. And very English-sounding. I'll let you know when I do.

ON EDIT 2: Is there a turntable named Simon Yorke? I think that's it.

Dear Phelonious Ponk: I can re-start from here. Thank you for your answers it help me to " figure " and understand in a more precise way why you don't concede almost nothing in favor of analog and all to digital.

I have to say that I agree with some of your " general " concepts and opinion about active speakers or tube electronics and that I totally accept the digital alternative but for different reasons that yours.

Hearing music through active speakers could makes a difference but this sole subject IMHO can't makes that one person prefer digital over analog or analog over digital, at least not in so radical way like you states.

I'm worried more on other aspects of your daily system playback:

- you hear a system that's is " severe " limited on the music foundation: bass range. Even that you support digital that suppose goes way down there.

- you heard music mainly by headphones when people like me and like the majority in this forum hear/heard and enjoy music through speakers that permit " live " the music through all our senses/body: just like in a live event.

- for many years you did not hear/heard the analog alternative in your own system in daily or weekly time way.

there are others but these three " subjects " makes and preclude that PP can argue in a non-biased way on the analog whole alternative, don't you think? or at least you can't go on on the subject if you don't go out/emerge of your very especial and specific " island " where only you live and where you have no today analog reference in your " especial " system.

PP IMHO there is almost no possibility that you can understand the analog alternative advantages and with no " understanding " is almost useless any " debate " that has no equilibrum because I understand both alternatives and you understand one of them and " think " ( only think ) that you understand or know analog alternative but this is your mistake.

Anyway, this comes from other thread and I think is interesting to read it:
http://www.audioholics.com/educatio...ynamic-comparison-of-lps-vs-cds-part-4-page-2 and this is interesting too:
http://www.audioholics.com/educatio...loring-digital-audio-myths-and-reality-part-1


Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Btw, Steve: I posted twice ( latter on in the last two thread pages. ) on the thread subject but your friend don't come back.

 

[Ron Party]

Anyway, this comes from other thread and I think is interesting to read it:
http://www.audioholics.com/educatio...ynamic-comparison-of-lps-vs-cds-part-4-page-2

That article by Christine Tham was discussed in brief here.

 

[silviajulieta]

That article by Christine Tham was discussed in brief here.

Dear Ron: So brief that I can't find " substance " there.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[Steve williams]

I thought I was the only one who couldn't find it either Raul. I thought I was getting old

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Dear Phelonious Ponk: I can re-start from here. Thank you for your answers it help me to " figure " and understand in a more precise way why you don't concede almost nothing in favor of analog and all to digital.

Raul, you misunderstand me! I concede almost everything to analog! Probably 90% of my favorite recordings are analog. I was a long-time owner/operator of a turntable rig and a R2R deck and have spent many, many happy hours in studios, producing what I believed was beautiful audio, mostly in the days when analog ruled. I love analog recordings, I just don't like vinyl. Even there, I concede that if you like vinyl better, good for you, enjoy the music, be happy. I will even concede that if it sounds better to you, then for you it is better.

There are just two small things I'm not conceding:

1) That vinyl is equal to or better than cd on the core specs of noise, distortion, dynamic range and channel separation. If someone has independent data to the contrary, I'm listening.

2) That I not only have to hear, but have to live with whatever vinyl rig whomever is arguing with my small points considers to be SOTA before my point of view can be considered legitimate.

I could go over to a buddy's house tonight and listen to his Simon Yourke (if I've got that right) and his Mac stack again and conclude, again, that I don't personally like the sound of a high-end vinyl system as much as I like lossless files into my active system. I could go out and buy a SOTA vinyl rig, listen to it for the next six months, come back here and express the same conclusions. Do you think all the vinylfiles would suddenly say "Oh Phelonious must be right, he listened to both and still likes digital playback best." Nah. They'd still like what they like and I'd still like what I like, and if we got lucky, we'd all happily agree to disagree. We can go ahead and do that now.

Which leaves us with nothing but the only thing that's not subjective, those sticky metrics: Noise, distortion, dynamic range and channel separation. Measurements don't tell the whole story, but those four provide a pretty good plot outline.

P