"But don't say that the sound is better"

Mikey081057

I like all the formats cept for MP3.... can't do cans or earbuds...analog or digital... I like to listen to my tt and I like to listen to SACD/CD and digital streaming.... Love the convenience of streaming love the detail of SACD... I like tubes and SS love my tube phono pre into my ss line level pre... everybody has their own definition of HI in HI FI. I love the sound of my 1930's tube radio.... it sounds like **** by today's standards but it shows how far we have come as listeners...

F1nut

Sorry Jesse but this is a really bad analogy anyway you look at it your comparing apples & oranges. You just can't compare digital video to digital audio there completely different animals, also people hear far better than they can see so it's easier to fool ones eyes than there ears.

Yeah I don't know, seems like a fair enough analogy.

Something else I just thought off, Aren't most recording studios digital now days with as many tracks as you need or want where as analog studios had what 24 tracks max and if so then that brand new vinyl album you bought was mixed down from a digital master recording.

Oh snap.That one's gotta sting a little bit! LOL

In the end this whole analog vs digital debate is about as useful as a cable debate. Those who swear by analog will never be convinced otherwise, same go's for the digital crowd.

Agreed.

treitz3

F1nut wrote: »

Oh snap.That one's gotta sting a little bit! LOL

Touché. LOL

Tom

pkquat

All very interesting.

I think much of the early opinions of the digital format were based on both the recording and playback equipment of the time. There were issues in recording that people were less aware of when it was first introduced. The playback methods and oversampling frequencies produced some unexpected results. Noise, whether audible or not, was introduced that people did not find pleasing. In other cases there was a lack of wanted noise.

There have been studies that people like some type of noise in recordings. This gives it more of a live sound (live as in living vs cold and dead). Concert halls have their own sound due to reflections. This is added noise. When some newer halls were built and reflections were minimized, it was found that while it was more accurate, something was missing. Some of the early digital recordings were extremely isolated, and in other cases the "warmth" (noise) that a studios equipment had was lost when they went to digital. Good recording engineers knew the value of the studio room acoustics, and incorporated that into recordings. This was all done by ear.

There is more the to whole VHS thing, and Hi-Fi VHS that I do not recall. Its been too long. There was also S-VHS which gave you the extra lines. (Side note argument - RIP Betamax, lol) Of the 525 scan lines only 483 were used. There was some extra information for "analog" TV's vs a true digital format that did not require this (google / wiki NTSC). The other interesting note is that TV / VHS is essentially a digital signal recorded /transmitted in an analog form. There was also a digital form of VHS that was rare since DVR's came out shortly afterwards.

70mm vs ?? As I recall a lot of movie studio digital surpasses the grain structure of most film. That said 70mm is much higher resolution than 4K, about 8K if I recall, and the 8K is for the mass reproductions. (Side bar check out IMAX vs LieMAX if you paid for a digital IMAX movie.) I think 35mm is about 8K captured and around 4K in mass reproductions. The studio digital camera's have a much greater dynamic range than film stock. No need to change film for lighting or shutter speeds, and depth of field becomes less of an issue (imo this can take away some of the good creativity). Good digital cinemas are 4K, but many are still around 2K . One benefit is less/better compression than BluRay.

tonyb

pkquat wrote: »

All very interesting.


There have been studies that people like some type of noise in recordings. This gives it more of a live sound (live as in living vs cold and dead). Concert halls have their own sound due to reflections. This is added noise. When some newer halls were built and reflections were minimized, it was found that while it was more accurate, something was missing. Some of the early digital recordings were extremely isolated, and in other cases the "warmth" (noise) that a studios equipment had was lost when they went to digital. Good recording engineers knew the value of the studio room acoustics, and incorporated that into recordings. This was all done by ear.

.

Very true, but we have to separate the different types of noise. I think what your talking about is harmonic distortions on the first and 2nd order that gives tubed gear that soulful sound. That is what was taken out in early digital, and they've been trying to put it back in since then.....with little success.

For the longest time, we've recommended tubed pre's with SS amps, a best of both worlds scenario. You can't replace that wonderful midrange on a tubed pre with SS, and a tube amp can't hit the speed and dynamics of a SS amp. For most preferences, combining the 2 seem to work well but obviously there will be some with a strict preference for either or.

This all circles back to what we've been saying since the beginning. Let your eyes and ears judge. Good sound....and video can be had with any sized wallet. Enjoy the music, not the labels on the gear or tech inside.

madmax

Although I like giving F1 a hard time, I really think having hundreds of thousands of songs at ones fingertips is a bad thing. By the time I figure out what I want to hear, either vinyl or CDs, go and find it, open up the cover and go through the trouble of mounting a disc I am totally ready to sit down and enjoy the performance. I even enjoy waiting through some of the lesser songs waiting to get to one I really wanted to hear. (you realize that really good artists arrange an album with peaks and valleys in tone and beat to draw you into what they consider the performance to be, right?) As I've watched people collect everything they have in digital files I notice they start listening only to a particular part of a song and move on at the first thought of hearing something else, often times going through an album in minutes. After awhile they become just as happy not turning the machine on at all.

steveinaz

madmax wrote: »

With high res files out aren't CDs pretty much dead for audiophiles anyway?

Nahh...I only have 4 albums of 24/96 hi rez stuff. The vast majority of my flac files are from CD burns.

steveinaz

PolkMaster1 wrote: »

Hence - even with a CD Player connected to a great external DAC - the sound of vinyl always trumped over CD.

What external DAC do you run? I owned vinyl for years, so I'm fully aware of its capabilities and weaknesses.

tonyb

If you put as much effort and money into your digital as you might vinyl, I'm betting some would be surprised.

ledhed

I'd love to have a vinyl setup that sounded great but for the thousand or two I'd have to spend to get there, I'd rather buy a few hundred used CDs that I don't have to worry about storing or cleaning.

I'm very happy Vinyl has had a resurgence and all the hipsters are flocking to that and ignoring CDs. Used CDs are absolutely the best bargain in buying music these days.

I still buy some albums on vinyl - if the album is important to me, I just really enjoy having it on vinyl. With a canvas that size, the artwork means something. Comparatively though, a nicely thought out CD liner book with compelling content is also very enjoyable.

It's really all about the music, right? For me right now, it's first about getting the music I want and then trying to make the most of my system to reproduce that music. With a very limited budget, that means digital.

madmax

I certainly put a lot more $$ in the vinyl, and don't recommend it to those who are after bang for the buck. Also, I didn't buy a system, change a few components and then had great sound, it took years. Certainly it is easier to spend a several $K on digital and plug together the cables but you end up where you are and there is not much more you can do beyond that, as far as a source goes. With vinyl, everything matters, and must be attended to.

Nightfall

How do you vinyl only guys feel about reissues cut from high res digital files? Pink Floyd remasters, Led Zeppelin remasters, Rush remasters, etc.

Doesn't bother me any, listening to WYWH right now on vinyl cut from high res digital and it sounds amazing. The Rush reissues are even better than the originals cut from tape to me.

madmax

So long as the end product sounds right I don't care either way.

tonyb

madmax wrote: »

I certainly put a lot more $$ in the vinyl, and don't recommend it to those who are after bang for the buck. Also, I didn't buy a system, change a few components and then had great sound, it took years. Certainly it is easier to spend a several $K on digital and plug together the cables but you end up where you are and there is not much more you can do beyond that, as far as a source goes. With vinyl, everything matters, and must be attended to.

I dunno man, I might argue that everything matters with digital too, with any format really. Hasn't DK displayed that in his office rig ?

madmax

I guess in some ways, which USB cable etc.

Jhayman

I have roughly the same $$ amount invested in my Vinyl rig as my Digital rig.
I like them both the same, sometimes my vinyl rig wins the player of the day other times my digital rig wins for the day..
As for liking one more than the other for sound preference, well like many have said here already I really depends on what I am playing.
I don't have a CD player hooked up anymore, I have ripped all my CD's to my Bryston internal HD.
Here in Toronto we have a radio Stn that is has a format called Vinyl Tuesday's people really seem to like it as it is still going strong.
To me my vinyl side seems more alive in a way, as my digital side seems more cold/ sterile but in a good way..
I usually keep my vinyl playing to Sunday's where I have more time to due the vinyl process and my digital will be in use during the weekdays and for when I have people over, unless they wish to hear my TT..
Like someone already said this thread is about as useless as a cable thread..
Each to their own because everybody likes what they like..

Nightfall

I think he means there are more ways to tweak the sound of vinyl than digital. There's more aftermarket.

Record clamps, platter material (acrylic, mdf, etc), platter mats, stylus, cartridge, different tonearms... what am I missing?

ukcolin99

Love this thread, thanks nut.

madmax

Nightfall wrote: »

I think he means there are more ways to tweak the sound of vinyl than digital. There's more aftermarket.

Record clamps, platter material (acrylic, mdf, etc), platter mats, stylus, cartridge, different tonearms... what am I missing?

Yes, but again tonyb is right, there are lots of little things to do to digital also. Its just that you are not going to sit a CD player or DAC on different types of wood and get different characteristics like you can a turntable. Maybe very minor differences but its not going to go from one character to another to get what you want.

bikezappa

I agree completely.

I'm advocating dark clothes
If I'm not alone
How long have I been asleep
As long as I have
Did you ever live in a drum?
No
Well then you aren't me
I only dreamed I lived in a drum
Ever since it got dark
Dreaming is hard
Yea, but with nothing over your head?
No just light over my head and underneath too
I don't think I could take it without anything over my head
M-m - ? ? ?
Well why don't you go out and see what's out there?
Well I don't know if that's what's out there.
That's a thought, if you'd like
Yes but still you can say darker and darker
I don't know what the outside of this thing looks like at all
I knew it's dark and murky
How do you get your water so dark?
Cause I'm paranoid
I'm very paranoid and the water in my washing machine turns dark out
Of sympathy
Out of sympathy?
Yes
Um where can I get that?
At your local drug store
How much?
It's from kansas

Frank Zappa - Lumpy Gravy

tonyb

madmax wrote: »

So long as the end product sounds right I don't care either way.

.....and that's the ticket right there.

Your also right, a TT itself has many levels of adjustment that can be done/upgraded etc. Only so much you can do with a digital player. My comments were more so directed at looking at either or as a whole, not just a specific piece.

madmax

So see there, I'm not so anti-digital! My biggest problem is I listen to LPs for awhile, put a CD on and I'm wowed by the dynamics. That wow fairly quickly turns into fatigue. The next LPs sound lame but after a few of them the dynamics seem correct and tend to remain correct. Until I put on another CD of course. Its really hard trying to appreciate both unless you can keep them seperated, different systems or whatever.

heiney9

The fatigue you describe could be another issue in your rig. Fatigue really shouldn't be an issue with a digital front end these days at the levels you are at with gear.

Cables, tubes, room acoustics, other gear could be causing the fatigue when listening to digital. Now that I have my digital system dialed in, I can't remember the last time I stopped listening because of fatigue. It's been a non issue for quite some time now.

H9

Lord Vader

Once you GIVE yourself to the dark side, forever will it dominate your destiny.

madmax

heiney9 wrote: »

The fatigue you describe could be another issue in your rig. Fatigue really shouldn't be an issue with a digital front end these days at the levels you are at with gear.

Cables, tubes, room acoustics, other gear could be causing the fatigue when listening to digital. Now that I have my digital system dialed in, I can't remember the last time I stopped listening because of fatigue. It's been a non issue for quite some time now.

H9

I have optimized for vinyl, I have optimized for digital. Can't seem to optimize for both.

bikezappa

Fatigue could be related to volume of audio.

BlueFox

Personally, all I want to do is listen to music, not frack with it. I can listen to multiple CDs or playlist songs for hours without moving and with no fatigue. Nor does the source degrade a tiny bit every time I listen to it. Yes, I am lazy when it comes to listening to music, and that is a good thing since it puts me into some zone that I do not want to leave.

soundfreak1

BlueFox wrote: »

Personally, all I want to do is listen to music, not frack with it. I can listen to multiple CDs or playlist songs for hours without moving and with no fatigue. Nor does the source degrade a tiny bit every time I listen to it. Yes, I am lazy when it comes to listening to music, and that is a good thing since it puts me into some zone that I do not want to leave.

This is telling (the above comment) I dont listen to the music as much as I listen to my audio system reproducing music. So "fraking" with it is part of the hobby, a big part, a very enjoyable part. If it was all about the music a transistor radio would be exceptable. If I have a choice of listening to a piece of music on cd or vinyl I will choose vinyl every time. Due to this preference i have duplicated all my favorable music I own on cd's with vinyl versions and now vinyl is about 95+% of my listening choice. There are some really well recorded cd's i enjoy hearing and there are some bad vinyl recordings (I just dont listen to them.)

Nightfall

Just because one isn't content with a transistor radio for listening to music doesn't mean it isn't all about the music for them

soundfreak1

With 8, "I's" and no "them's" in my above post I don't thing I was talking about "them" just myself.