WBF Poll: Which Sounds Better, Digital or Analog?

[amirm]

Chunking is a very small part of the issues with short term memory. The main issue is that short term memory operates via a serial rather than parallel processing system. Therefore it gets bogged down very easily with too much info. For example, if we are playing 1 on 1 basketball and I make a fake quickly followed within a 100 ms by a second fake, you will freeze because your brain can not process quickly enough.

There is no processing involved in short-term memory. It is a total capture which your brain can then recall as needed. Ever ask someone to repeat something but before they do, realize you now know what they said? You just rewound the tape and heard it again from short-term memory.

The long term memory in contrast, involves cognition/thinking/processing. The brain analyzes the short term memory, takes out what it wants and discards the rest. The data reduction is huge and hence our ability to remember so much over our living history. This process by definition requires thought and analysis. The short-term memory does not.

And short term memory is not reliable and that has been shown in test after test. Just ask bystanders for a description of a criminal; no two will match. Or when working with somebody and to facilitate task acquisition, it is imperative that you don't talk to the subject for at least 30 seconds before the task so as not to overload short term memory capability.

These continue to be wrong parallels Myles. We are talking about how your hearing works. You are telling me what your vision system stored for long term recall. Asking someone hours, days and even longer what they saw is not a parallel to short term auditory memory.

We have ton of test to back what I say just the same including my own personal test. I can create a test of two files where one is objectively and audibly different. By changing the time interval, I can test you and have results that are 100% reliable in detection to random chance. All by lengthening the switchover time. Most accurate results will be from reliance on short term memory, not longer.

Same goes with perception. Too much heightened sensory activity and perception goes down.

And as far as tests, there are a host of issues.

These are just arguments thrown out there it seems Myles to see what sticks in lay mind. The auditory science and recall ability has been heavily studied and tested. It is not subject to doubt in the manner you are putting forward.

 

[sbo6]

? www.centerpointaudio.com/Analog-VS-Digital.aspx

? www.npr.org/2012/02/10/146697658/why-vinyl-sounds-better-than-cd-or-not

? www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb10/articles/analoguewarmth.htm

? www.mix-engineer.com/audio-philosophy/digital-vs-analog-recording/

• http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4303

? www.quora.com/Audio-and-Acoustical-Engineering/What-is-the-highest-fidelity-medium-ever

? www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-record-players-have-the-best-sound-quality

Not going to re-read all the tech articles of sampling, etc. Been there done that many times. I also found it interesting that the one comparison on this thread - NVS turntable in the same system as a Playback Designs MPS-5 is pitting a ~$40K TT w/o preamp, rack, cartridge etc. vs a $15K SACD player and the opinions on which is better vary. Again, $ for $.....

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I voted for Analog, but see my bias in my signature.

Now that I've seen the distortions caused by tape recording - the "head bump" and frequency response anomalies caused by alignment issues, etc. I can intellectually understand why I prefer the distortions coming from listening to tape.

During the Dragon Party, I played Saint-Saens Symphony No. 3 Charles Munch RCA for tres amigos. I have many copies of this including the original, the AP re-issue, various CD masterings and SACD. When I played the DSD through the Genesis Muse, it sounded thin, strident and lacking in body (the speaker was also not yet well run-in). Playing the tape copy of the same DSD file, it sounded full and warm. This was the version I much preferred.

Another instance was a vinyl needle drop made in 24/176.4 vs the vinyl. I had scratched the vinyl since making the needle drop (thank goodness as I have been unable to find a replacement in as good a condition) and now I prefer listening to the digital copy. If you asked me to A/B the unscratched part of the vinyl vs the digital, I would be unable to tell the difference.

Last week, I had some guys from the local audio society come over as we were breaking-in a set of the mini-Dragons. One brought a 45rpm of Stevie Ray Vaughan's Couldn't Stand The Weather and wanted to play Tin Pan Alley. The bass sounded over-blown and muddy. I had a few other pressings, and I brought some of them out. Of all the vinyl, the one we most preferred turned out to be the Sundazed re-issue (not the original, MFSL or Pure Pleasure). However, what blew the vinyl away was a 16/44.1 file. Unfortunately, I have NO idea where this file came from. One CES, someone brought in a USB stick with this file and wanted to listen to it on my server. After copying it in, we played it and it was stunning. By the time I turned around to ask where the file came from, he had already left the room. I've bought every CD re-issue I can find of this album and still can't find it. I'm beginning to wonder if it was from a Sony Mastersound Longbox...... In this particular case, I far and away prefer the digital.

Gary, (and Michael relative to your 'soft bass' comment--'soft bass' is exactly the opposite of what I hear from the tt)

I respect this 'over-blown' and 'muddy' bass that you describe from the SRV 45. there is an issue to consider though particularly with speakers with considerable bass output in the vicinity of the tt.

when I got my MM7's without realizing it I found a few pressings all of a sudden had some tubbiness bordering on distortion in the bass. I had a few records where the female vocals with lots of fullness would sound wooley and even I thought there was groove damage. maybe previously I had had some slight concern but now it was extreme.

then I got the Herzan and poof, all those issues were history. those 7 foot tall 750 pound bass towers were defeating my previously effective decoupling. likely the big and bigger Genesis towers can do that too.

not that the other pressing of SRV might not be better or that the redbook file better yet, could be that simple. but maybe not. a speaker which can tell you about all the bass a record may have might challenge your decoupling capability. unfortunately these things always require eliminating the cause of the distortion before one realizes it was feedback distortion to begin with. and I have a Herzan under my dart preamp too as it can be an issue there.

 

[audio-land]

("My memory was that he LP had very soft bass compared to digital.")


My ears hear the opposite. LP reveals bass and lower region much better than digital which can be easily noticed, at least by me.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

To the extent you are a contrarian, the person who set it up is someone for whom I know you have a lot of respect. I don't think there were any problems with the setup.

ok, I know of whom you refer to and agree he is very good. I can ask him his opinion about this question.

 

[MylesBAstor]

There is no processing involved in short-term memory. It is a total capture which your brain can then recall as needed. Ever ask someone to repeat something but before they do, realize you now know what they said? You just rewound the tape and heard it again from short-term memory.

The long term memory in contrast, involves cognition/thinking/processing. The brain analyzes the short term memory, takes out what it wants and discards the rest. The data reduction is huge and hence our ability to remember so much over our living history. This process by definition requires thought and analysis. The short-term memory does not.


These continue to be wrong parallels Myles. We are talking about how your hearing works. You are telling me what your vision system stored for long term recall. Asking someone hours, days and even longer what they saw is not a parallel to short term auditory memory.

We have ton of test to back what I say just the same including my own personal test. I can create a test of two files where one is objectively and audibly different. By changing the time interval, I can test you and have results that are 100% reliable in detection to random chance. All by lengthening the switchover time. Most accurate results will be from reliance on short term memory, not longer.


These are just arguments thrown out there it seems Myles to see what sticks in lay mind. The auditory science and recall ability has been heavily studied and tested. It is not subject to doubt in the manner you are putting forward.

Amir this has zero to do with vision but all about cognition. You need to read some new textbooks. When I'm back home Sunday, I'll post a few titles that certainly contradict your assertion about short term memory and processing.

You should also read the aforementioned book The Brain That Changes Itself.

http://www.amazon.com/Brain-That-Ch...226793&sr=8-1&keywords=The+brain+that+changes

As far as the brain is concerned, there is no difference between senses and for example leading researchers in Germany and Israel are using sound to teach blind people to see or taste to teach people to be able to stand. It's all about primary vs. secondary neural networks and disspelling the ages old notion that only certain parts of the brain are responsible for specific actions. As you know, when we reach 12 (this also happens in the third trimester of development in utero) the brain prunes those pathways that we don't use and strengthens by myelination the networks we do use. That's why from when we are born to 12 or so, there are critical,things we must do from year to year to fully develop our brains and physical and mental capabilities. We all know the one about speaking a foreign language before 12. Well those pruned pathways never go away and these people through much effort are able to help these people gain lost abilities and senses. And the key to this is that all senses are just another input to the brain.

 

[Al M.]

May us vinyl devotees, equipment designers and customers collectively, forever driving improvements in analog, continue to work to keep the ultimate musical pleasure of analog out of the reach of digital.

This is a very odd statement. So you purposefully want listeners to digital not to reach ultimate musical pleasure? And thus exclude a majority of new musical material, which is only available in digital, from delivering ultimate musical pleasure?

If you really love music, wouldn't you want that it can fully deliver its message through both analog and digital? So the music of the artists that record or release only in digital is not worthy to be fully enjoyed? How odd.

You want the art form of music to be at war with itself? So that only the 'analog' side wins?

 

[NorthStar]

? www.centerpointaudio.com/Analog-VS-Digital.aspx

? www.npr.org/2012/02/10/146697658/why-vinyl-sounds-better-than-cd-or-not

? www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb10/articles/analoguewarmth.htm

? www.mix-engineer.com/audio-philosophy/digital-vs-analog-recording/

• http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4303

? www.quora.com/Audio-and-Acoustical-Engineering/What-is-the-highest-fidelity-medium-ever

? www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-record-players-have-the-best-sound-quality

Not going to re-read all the tech articles of sampling, etc. Been there done that many times. I also found it interesting that the one comparison on this thread - NVS turntable in the same system as a Playback Designs MPS-5 is pitting a ~$40K TT w/o preamp, rack, cartridge etc. vs a $15K SACD player and the opinions on which is better vary. Again, $ for $.....

You don't have to re-read them if you have already. But some folks might enjoy reading them in the order that I posted them (I took my time to make the link's order as comprehensible as I can). > I did my research too, and I also read them all. ...Plus much more; but them seven links were the ones I picked @ the end.

I don't mind spending hours in searching for the best info on this subject, and post the links that I found the most relevant and educational.
Heck, even Dr. Sean Olive is commenting (second link).

I grew up with vinyl, like most of the members here. And I also had an open-reel-tape deck @ one point; mainly to record my own music playing.
I also much later on record my own music playing using a mix of analog and digital tape recorders.
I don't have enough experience in life to have a valid opinion on analog and digital audio; I used them both, and still.
I don't know with exact abso!ute which of which sounds the very best, because I never had the very best in neither mediums; tapes, LPs, CDs, DSD, hi-res, ...
From my extremely limited experience (less than 50 years in this audio hobby), and with very inexpensive audio gear, to me what sounds best is the music playing, and through the last fifty years it played through all those mediums, and those were and still are the best years of my life. ...To me, that, sounds the real best.

And if we need to go in depth, no need to go any further than the first link above (first quote). ...That, is the scientific aspect. ...Nothing theoretical about it.
And that science has a lot to do with our emotional connection, in regards to analogue. There isn't a single drop of a shadow doubt about it.

Today I still use both music mediums, and I enjoy them both. ...Music is music, and it's all good when it's good music to the ears, and soul.

I voted Analogue, mainly from my heart. ...And that was the right vote; I know that for certain...the closest emotional music connection with the real live event.
Digital is simply more convenient, for travelling and being lazy @ home.

 

[PeterA]

$ for $ digital wins. There are simply too many required components for analog to be as cost/performance effective. However, cost no object at this point in time it's close between DSD and analog. As digital gets better and better (and it has made great strides over the past decade) it will likely surpass analog.

This is an interesting observation that others have also made. However, analog has also been improving and by some accounts, the vinyl record itself is improving. (there is an interesting video in the latest on line issue of AnalogPlanet). Just read the TAS review of the TechDas AirForce One turntable and the Stereophile review of the SAT tone arm. Both extreme raves, but the argument can and has been made that analog SOTA keeps getting better.

Similar observations have been made between tube and solid state electronics. The best examples of each sound more and more like real music. That implies that they are starting to sound more and more similar. I think the same can be said of digital and analog. As both improve, both sound more real and both sound more like each other. They will each continue to be viable and have their advocates. It is a very exciting time for audio.

It has become a cliche to quote Rodney King, but "can't we all just get along?"

 

[sbo6]

Pure speculation on your part. First, you have zero idea what the Nomad is but apparently now without even having heard the table, you have already made your mind up.

Let me also add that it has always been a myth that inexpensive CD players are better than their comparable turntable counterpart. Many years ago, probably back either in the late '80S or early '90s, we did a series of comparisons between the inexpensive (IIRC around $500 or so) Music-Hall turntable and the then much raved about ($1800 or so) California Audio Labs Cd/DVD player. (In fact, I reviewed the CAL back then.) It wasn't even close. The CAL sounded muffled, lacked low end, etc. compared to Roy's entry level table.

You obviously didn't read my post carefully. I clearly stated "at this point in time" for digital vs analog, not 1989. And seriously, you are comparing digital of 25 years ago as if it's applicable today? I presume the OP is asking for feedback of digital vs analog relative to this century.

Also, while I have not heard the Nomad my opinion and assessment is based on my experiences - the same as yours is.

 

[rockitman]

A lot of mental gymnastics going on...

 

[NorthStar]

Christian, ...I'm not sure about that young lady above... She fits in your new car?

 

[Al M.]

This is an interesting observation that others have also made. However, analog has also been improving and by some accounts, the vinyl record itself is improving. (there is an interesting video in the latest on line issue of AnalogPlanet). Just read the TAS review of the TechDas AirForce One turntable and the Stereophile review of the SAT tone arm. Both extreme raves, but the argument can and has been made that analog SOTA keeps getting better.

Similar observations have been made between tube and solid state electronics. The best examples of each sound more and more like real music. That implies that they are starting to sound more and more similar. I think the same can be said of digital and analog. As both improve, both sound more real and both sound more like each other. They will each continue to be viable and have their advocates. It is a very exciting time for audio.

It has become a cliche to quote Rodney King, but "can't we all just get along?"

I completely agree.

SS amps couldn't deliver proper microdynamics a few decades ago, that was the domain of good tube amps. Now the best can do that as well. In a similar way, the best tube amps now deliver more of the perceived frequency linearity and great bass that used to be the exclusive domain of SS amps, due to, among others, much better power supplies that allow the tubes to be in their optimum working range most or all of the time.

In a similar manner, the best LP playback acquires more of the perceived linearity of digital playback, while digital acquires more of the resolution thus far reserved for analog (which indeed also gets better all the time).

And so on.

 

[ddk]

A lot of mental gymnastics going on...

Looks like a great test for your Table Stable, you should get her to come over and do some of them jacks next to your AF-1. Just make sure she doesn't keel over the table! She can serve for acoustics too, left and right channel seem in perfect balance!

david

 

[TBone]

SS amps couldn't deliver proper microdynamics a few decades ago, that was the domain of good tube amps. Now the best can do that as well. In a similar way, the best tube amps now deliver more of the perceived frequency linearity and great bass that used to be the exclusive domain of SS amps, due to, among others, much better power supplies that allow the tubes to be in their optimum working range most or all of the time.

(sigh), let's open up another can-of-worms based on yet another blanket statement/mass generalization.

 

[Al M.]

(sigh), let's open up another can-of-worms based on yet another blanket statement/mass generalization.

What's wrong with both SS and tube amps getting better? (shrug)

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

A lot of mental gymnastics going on...

Girfriend?

 

[sbo6]

Please go back and reread my quote. You have taken it out of context. Simply there are and have always been inexpensive tables that rival inexpensive digital.

More to the point, I can listen to the tables for more than 15 minutes without getting a headache. That's why someone going to a show or even a dealer and hearing something for five or ten minutes and drawing a conclusion is asking for trouble. In fact, in my years, my experience has been those components, parts, etc. that sound great after 10 minutes of listening don't stand the test of time. And those components that don't bowl you over at first listen, often over time win you over because you realize they sound like music.

Meanwhile, you still haven't heard the Nomad and while everyone is entitled to their opinion, it would seem reasonable to have an opinion based on experience.

You are continually raising the nomad listening experience which I clearly stated I have not had heard, yet that 1 data point seems to be your argument for analog. Have you heard a number of highly recommended Chinese ~1K DACs? The same flawed argument applies...

Also, WRT to your statement above, "Simply there are and have always been inexpensive tables that rival inexpensive digital."

Is an extremely myopic view and is a bit surprising from a reviewer. I guess you are forever biased against digital which a shame considering your career choice. I'll end my comments with a request that you give digital a chance; good digital sounds exemplary IMO and is only improving. Analog sounds excellent also but comes at a price, is inconvenient and is somewhat limited in supply IMO.

 

[TBone]

What's wrong with both SS and tube amps getting better? (shrug)

Nothing wrong with that premise, I'll drill down ...

SS amps couldn't deliver proper microdynamics a few decades ago, that was the domain of good tube amps.

1) the entire macro/micro DyNaMiC debate is highly speculative.
2) dynamic capability, big small or in between, is more or less the DOMAIN of the source component, esp from a vinyl point of view.
3) 20 yrs ago, how did you manage to hear every amp, properly matched with every speaker, in every concievable room ... to come to your conclusion?

 

[garylkoh]

Did you try/buy the MasterSound (EK53927) 1994 remastered SBM gold CD ?

I looked at it some time ago, but IIRC they were over $100 for a used CD. I have other SBM longboxes, and some have been superlative, but I'm not sure I want to spend $400 for the current one available on eBay.

Gary, (and Michael relative to your 'soft bass' comment--'soft bass' is exactly the opposite of what I hear from the tt)

I respect this 'over-blown' and 'muddy' bass that you describe from the SRV 45. there is an issue to consider though particularly with speakers with considerable bass output in the vicinity of the tt.

It was only on this particularly pressing that the bass was over-blown and muddy. Comparing the other pressings to the redbook file and also other albums I didn't detect any bass feedback distortion. I think that between the suspension on the turntable, and 3 levels of decoupling in my rack, I didn't have that problem. I've done needle drops with and without the speakers playing and haven't detected any problems.