WBF Poll: Which Sounds Better, Digital or Analog?
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
I heard that in a blind listening tests some people mistook Justin Bieber for Ella Fitzgerald.
mep
A valid comparison cannot truly be made when one knows. The mechanism are well known and those biases are powerful. However much we despise those removed-knowledge testings, they are invalluable. I do not expect every audiophile to go listening and choosing gear blind. It isn't practical or easy. i do however believe that the removal of knowledge would sway more than one opinion: I have too often witnessed analog lovers fall for needle drops. It is not life and death but one stays "obliterated" I have to roll my eyes because the differences are usually extremely subtle when knowledge is removed .. Professionals and even some audiophile/industry pundits have attested to such... Upon knowledge? Everything comes back full fledge.
On that my reply to the post would be that to me none sounds better.. They do however can sound vastly different. Analog remains sounding analog but digital can sound almost as analog as one would want or with all the sins wrongly inputed to digital.
Hi all,
I guess I will, legitimately, join this discussion and (hopefully) be able to cast my vote as well in a couple of weeks time by when I am expecting my maiden venture into analog to come to fruition (-:
But from what I have heard so far on other systems, I can't wait to set up my analog rig!
Watch the space....
Cheers
Sujay
I guess I will, legitimately, join this discussion and (hopefully) be able to cast my vote as well in a couple of weeks time by when I am expecting my maiden venture into analog to come to fruition (-:
But from what I have heard so far on other systems, I can't wait to set up my analog rig!
Watch the space....
Cheers
Sujay
Point is that 3/4 of the people can't tell the difference between meat and fish without their eyesight. Does that mean they actually taste the same?
Another example. Try standing barefoot on one foot for a minute. Then close your eyes and try standing barefoot on one foot for 30 seconds. 99% of people can't do this; or count yourself lucky if you can.Does this mean one can't stand on one foot? No with appropriate training one can begin to better harness proprioception.
Bottom line is anytime one removes a sensory input, the brain is thrown into utter confusion. Same goes for blind testing; all one is proving is that short term memory is unreliable and has very limited processing capabilities and "disc" space. Hell we've known that for decades if not more. But any cop could tell you that just as we don't really understand how short term memory is converted into long term memory.
I think people have to get their heads out of engineering books and start understanding the underlying biology because they are just rediscovering the wheel in many cases.. One excellent place to start with understanding the neuroscience behind sensory input is with the book The Brain That Changes Itself, an excellent review of current research and understanding of how the brain works and primary vs. secondary neural networks.
The point is that the differences are not as obvious as you pretend these to be. You are moving the discussion. We are not talking about removing one sense, no! we are talking removing the knowledge This is how you would reach a more valuable conclusion, eliminating the biases as much as possible.
Perception is a matter of visualization. We use all of our senses to detect what the real deal might be, with very faulty sensory data. I can play a guitar on a clock radio or the highest-end audio system. In both cases, the brain has no problem whatsoever determining that I am listening to a guitar. It converses the sensory cues into a visual image we have of a guitar playing.
Marketing people of course know what you state and they amp up the aspects of the experience that would make you think there is better sound than there is. And especially to males in the population who have these misconceptions like "if a little bit is good, a lot is better." I distinctly remember burning the lawn in our first home by putting too much fertilizer on it.
So yes, what you say is right. But no, it doesn't help one or other side make their argument.
In Karate they teach you to bend your knees to do that. I learned that when I was 15 and since then, no problem standing on one foot.
Short-term memory has superb reliability compared to long term. Its problem is what you state, capacity. It is measured in short few seconds before the brain massively filters what is there and only remembers enough characteristics it considers valid. I.e. create that visualization I talked about.
Oh, "we" understand it. Not everyone, but many audio experts do. We also understand marketing. And we know how we get to sell products to you all.
There are issues with blind tests potentially but are not what you are describing.
I've not compared those 4 dacs together.
but as far as comparing the PD (Playback Designs MPS-5) to top level vinyl I've done that every day for multiple hours for 7 years. you can read my posts in this thread for my conclusion.
I've heard the NVS turntable in the same system as an Playback Designs MPS-5. I felt the digital was superior. The NVS was setup well. All Dartzeel and YG top end stuff in a Jeff Hedback room.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
The poll has meaning to us. We like to know the makeup of our membership better. That way we can tailor our forum for the audience. If for example 80% of you were analog heads, we would be inviting more analog experts to join us. And vice versa. It also helps with the organization of the forum and ordering of subforums.
It is also useful if you are a member and walk into a discussion on these topics. Again, if the site was 80% analog, you would know that there would be some mass hanging if you were to say analog sucks.
I was very clear at the start that this is a simple poll to find out which side of the fence you are. The numbers will be what the numbers will be and should not create any tension.
For the question of what is more important to members or how they identify themselves, I think this WBF poll has the most relevance:
Digital Or Analog; How Do You Get Your Fix?
It's three years old though, perhaps it should be repeated.
$ 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.
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
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.
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.
Nomad + what cart ($) + what phono preamp ($) + what isolation base ($)? Vs. what digital box?
"Inexpensive digital players" = what $? I'd wager there are more than a handful of "inexpensive digital players" from China that would more than give the Nomad all in one a run for its $. I heard several at LASF that were frankly amazing for under $1k with exemplary build quality.
agree that not every person values the same sonic attributes equally.
wonder what the room owner thought about the comparison? you would assume that the room owner has heard lots of Lp's on the NVS and lots of digital on the PD.
certainly I have 10-20 digital discs/files I know I prefer to particular pressings (and there may be more I've not stumbled across). which is vastly different than preferring all digital files to all Lp pressings, or even the majority of digital dics/files to the majority of Lp pressings.
but still; i'm not in denial on your experience. I respect that you had that opinion.
a contrarian might ask how you knew the NVS was setup well. alas; i'm no contrarian.
In "The Quest for Perfect Sound" (The New Republic, 1985) Edward Rothstein attempts the most beautiful, wondrous and passionate explication of high-end audio ever written. Discussing the philosophical differences between analog and digital, Rothstein writes (quoting partially another article):
"Analog builds models on the optimistic assumption that our modeling technology is infinitely perfectible. . . . Digital, on the other hand, chooses a level of perfection -- the sampling rate -- not approximating perfection but perfecting our approximations."
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.
? 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
? 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
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.
There is no doubt there's a difference. I don't deny that. I also acknowledge there is a distortion to LPs which most anyone would agree is pleasant. My memory was that the LP had very soft bass compared to digital. We listened to some tracks across digital and LP. For me, first impressions count much more than anything else. I know I could grow accustomed to LP and love it too. But I've never felt the desire to go there. I might someday use my Lynx hilo and Acourate Convolver to setup a turntable. I think the needle crosstalk could be a big contributor to pleasant and easy sound to LP. The Acourate convolver attempts to emulate this effect in the digital domain. I like the way it sounds over the long term. I got an earthwork ZDT mic pre I could use with the Lynx A to D and do RIAA in digital. It will happen at some point. There's no need for a phono stage and I can apply the DSP I like in my system.
There is no doubt there's a difference. I don't deny that. I also acknowledge there is a distortion to LPs which most anyone would agree is pleasant. My memory was that the LP had very soft bass compared to digital. We listened to some tracks across digital and LP. For me, first impressions count much more than anything else. I know I could grow accustomed to LP and love it too. But I've never felt the desire to go there. I might someday use my Lynx hilo and Acourate Convolver to setup a turntable. I think the needle crosstalk could be a big contributor to pleasant and easy sound to LP. The Acourate convolver attempts to emulate this effect in the digital domain. I like the way it sounds over the long term. I got an earthwork ZDT mic pre I could use with the Lynx A to D and do RIAA in digital. It will happen at some point. There's no need for a phono stage and I can apply the DSP I like in my system.
Last edited:
