or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Confused: Vinyl(Analog) vs Digital
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Confused: Vinyl(Analog) vs Digital - Page 4

post #46 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Erik View Post

1. I don't know. There's a lot of debate and I've gotten incredible sound from both digital and analog. With digital, I prefer hi-rez; I run both SACD and DVD-A. It is safe to say you can get great sound from both. Which is why I run both. Format snobbery is not going to get in the way of enjoying music.

2. Vinyl is often better mastered than the typical "Loudness War" CD you find today. But CDs can be mastered very, very well. One reason I love SACD is that it is sort of a guarantee that the mastering is done well. Though that argument is complicated because the vast majority of SACDs are classical and jazz, which tend to be mastered very well on CDs. Still, I'll pay a few extra dollars for hi-rez. I like to get the best possible recording.

3. Vinyl playback is tricky and capricious. The gear can be viciously expensive, then you have to set it up correctly. Even then, there's a bit of maintenance and upkeep. My hi-rez digital players are a lot easier to deal with. Still, I found it worthwhile to invest deeply in vinyl playback. The technology hasn't changed much, so I think the rig will be about as good as it gets for years. Digital changes every 18-24 months. I won't spend a lot on digital because something better and cheaper is usually on the horizon. For digital, I'll hang a generation or two behind and upgrade with used gear when it gets affordable. I don't think the Michell Orbe and SME IV will be much improved upon in the next 20-30 years, so I went whole hog. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. There isn't a lot of R&D being sunk into vinyl, so what's good today will probably be good in 2021 and beyond.



I enjoyed reading Uncle Eric's thoughts on the matter. I think he's a real smart guy. Like UE, I think it's all good. I've got a 32 year old Sony PS-4750 TT with Shure V15 VMR. Each  has satisfied me from day one. Today, this TT/Cart is used to get my LP collection into my iTunes library.Thing is, I cannot distinguish the digitized material from the original LP's when I've set recording levels decently. In fact, most everything I've got in my iTunes library, from 256k downloads to 24/96 wav files sounds as good as SACD from my Sony DVP-S9000ES. My route from laptop to JBL L100t3's: Windows 7 up-sampled to 24/96 USB, to X-FI HD converted to optical S/PDIF, to Sony TA-E9000ES pre/pro.


Edited by sterling1 - 8/2/11 at 5:40am
post #47 of 71

Got both, digital has the edge for me, if you take all eventualities on board, though I do prefer the more natural sound of vinyl, even with the snap crackle and pop.

post #48 of 71

The great part is that we have a ton of choices out there. Really after all it's based much on style. The LP guys are kinda like cool cats now. They think they are better. They think that there is really no contest as records are better. The LP guys really have it much harder. Look at what they do to get music.

 

 

1) Records take up space and he can warp them. They must be kept in order, but because he can't tilt his head at the correct angle to read the spine, finding one is really a chore. He need glasses if he is 50 just to read the spine. They are not in order like on a computer. So the LP guy has to look really high or really low and try to tilt his head and read these silly letters at the wrong angle as he is almost falling down.

 

He has very little light in his listening room so he trips on stuff walking along still looking for that @#$%^% record. Now he is pulling the records out and looking at the front covers because he can't find the thing! Where did it go?" Did someone barrow my record?" Finally it was the one record somehow pushed back in the collection and he went right by it." I knew where it was all the time."

 

 

2) He now has to make sure to get it out of the jacket. They roll out at times. Now he needs to clean the record. He needs to turn on the record cleaning machine. He has to get out the solution! He looks closely the record has two sides. Crap it was a double album. He has to get the other record and clean that one. He first puts the clean one back into the jacket.

 

OK........3) He takes the dust cover off the turntable. He has to dust the belts. He then gets the needle cleaner solution and very slowly cleans the needle. He uses an anti-static gun on the platter. He lowers the record onto the platter. At this point anything can happen if the trajectory is off there is a remote chance he will hit the grooves of the record with the edge of the platter. This record is from 1968 and will never be able to be found in this condition ever again. There is a level of stress here. Not maybe the level of stress doing open hart surgery but maybe the level of stress of just holding his breath for a moment every time he puts a new record on. He then screws down the record clamp. This is all well but at this point he is reminded if the record is warped or not.

He turns on the turntable and picks up the needle and places it at the exact place on the record as he holds his breath not to damage the needle.

 

4) Music is finally heard. It's been 45 min. from the time he started looking for the record. The record side is less than 15 min long. Then the process starts all over again.

 

5) He forgot to check the rpm speed. This record could be playing too fast? He needs adjustment here right in the middle of the side.

 

 

 

 

The digital guy turns on the PC finds the picture in the dark on I-Tunes and pushes play.

 

 

 


Edited by Redcarmoose - 8/2/11 at 9:25am
post #49 of 71



Yeah, LoL, thats those eventualities I mentioned, pure therapy when in the mood though. 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redcarmoose View Post

The great part is that we a a ton of choices out there. Really after all it's based much on style. The LP guys are kinda like cool cats now. They think they are better. They think that there is really no contest as records are better. The LP guys really have it much harder. Look at what they do to get music.

 

 

1) Records take up space and he can warp them. They must be kept in order, but because he can't tilt his head at the correct angle to read the spine it is really a chore. He need glasses if he is 50 just to read the spine. They are not in order like on a computer. So the LP guy has to look really high or really low and try to tilt his head and read these silly letters at the wrong angle as he is almost falling down. He has very little light in his listening room so he trips on stuff walking along still looking for that @#$%^% record. Now he is pulling the records out and looking at the front covers because he can't find the thing! Where did it go?" Did someone barrow my record?" Finally it was the one record somehow pushed back in the collection and he went right by it." I knew where it was all the time."

 

 

2) He now has to make sure to get it out of the jacket. They roll out at times. Now he needs to clean the record. He need to turn on the record cleaning machine.He has to get out the solution! He looks closely the record has two sides. Crap it was a double album. He has to get the other record and clean that one. He first puts the clean one back into the jacket.

 

OK........3) He takes the dust cover off the turn table. He has to dust the belts. He uses an anti-static gun on the platter. He lowers the record onto the platter. He then screws down the record clamp. This is all well but at this point he is reminded if the record is warped or not.

He turns on the turntable and picks up the needle and places it at the exact place on the record as he holds his breath not to damage the needle.

 

4) Music is finally heard. It's been 45 min. from the time he started looking for the record. The record side is less than 15 min long. Then the process starts all over again.

 

5) He forgot to check the rpm speed. This record could be playing too fast? We need adjustment here right in the middle of the side.

 

 

 

 

The digital guy turns on the PC finds the picture in the dark on I-Tunes and pushes play.

 

 

 



 

post #50 of 71

Lots of Jazz is still recorded in analogue and it still has a way bigger spectrum and more flavor. By the same token some things sound better in digital. Of all the stuff, reel to reel sounds the best of all and tubes sound better than solid state (transistors) Most audiophiles will tell you the same thing. You have to hear it on a high end system with a very good components! This guy who said digital is better and that records are just nostalgic, is the one with his head up his rear!

post #51 of 71

Sounds like some guy who's stoned out of his gourd! I record the records into my hard drive CD burner so All I Have To Do is PUSH PLAY. Sometimes I enjoy looking at the record and reading the liner notes and there is a lot of good info about the artist etc. Records create an atmosphere that you will never get from those cold hard sounding dry CD's!
 

post #52 of 71

Records were made for a hundred years and most music was recorded on vinyl and bakelight. Compare that to thirty years of CD's. You just can't!

post #53 of 71
Bakelight?
I think you mean Lacquer.
post #54 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyRay View Post

Bakelight?
I think you mean Lacquer.

It's "Bakelite," but yes - you are correct.  Bakelite was a thermosetting material, similar to resin and epoxy these days - meaning that it would be a very poor choice to manufacture records because it cannot be re-formed.  On the other hand, a thermoforming material can be heated and re-formed ad nauseum.

post #55 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redcarmoose View Post
 

The great part is that we have a ton of choices out there. Really after all it's based much on style. The LP guys are kinda like cool cats now. They think they are better. They think that there is really no contest as records are better. The LP guys really have it much harder. Look at what they do to get music.

 

 

1) Records take up space and he can warp them. They must be kept in order, but because he can't tilt his head at the correct angle to read the spine, finding one is really a chore. He need glasses if he is 50 just to read the spine. They are not in order like on a computer. So the LP guy has to look really high or really low and try to tilt his head and read these silly letters at the wrong angle as he is almost falling down.

 

He has very little light in his listening room so he trips on stuff walking along still looking for that @#$%^% record. Now he is pulling the records out and looking at the front covers because he can't find the thing! Where did it go?" Did someone barrow my record?" Finally it was the one record somehow pushed back in the collection and he went right by it." I knew where it was all the time."

 

 

2) He now has to make sure to get it out of the jacket. They roll out at times. Now he needs to clean the record. He needs to turn on the record cleaning machine. He has to get out the solution! He looks closely the record has two sides. Crap it was a double album. He has to get the other record and clean that one. He first puts the clean one back into the jacket.

 

OK........3) He takes the dust cover off the turntable. He has to dust the belts. He then gets the needle cleaner solution and very slowly cleans the needle. He uses an anti-static gun on the platter. He lowers the record onto the platter. At this point anything can happen if the trajectory is off there is a remote chance he will hit the grooves of the record with the edge of the platter. This record is from 1968 and will never be able to be found in this condition ever again. There is a level of stress here. Not maybe the level of stress doing open hart surgery but maybe the level of stress of just holding his breath for a moment every time he puts a new record on. He then screws down the record clamp. This is all well but at this point he is reminded if the record is warped or not.

He turns on the turntable and picks up the needle and places it at the exact place on the record as he holds his breath not to damage the needle.

 

4) Music is finally heard. It's been 45 min. from the time he started looking for the record. The record side is less than 15 min long. Then the process starts all over again.

 

5) He forgot to check the rpm speed. This record could be playing too fast? He needs adjustment here right in the middle of the side.

 

 

 

 

The digital guy turns on the PC finds the picture in the dark on I-Tunes and pushes play.

 

 

 


But sounds like shiiiit.

post #56 of 71
A thread back from the dead.  I just spend 10 minutes writing an answer to a 2010 post that I already answered!  I deleted that.
 
But I do have something new to add, an experiment I did a little while ago:
 

With the same tube amplifier, a BHSE, will genuine NOS Mullards, and Stax 007, I very carefully compared half-speed master LPs with the SACDs of the same recording, three times (all the half-speed masters I have), using a SoundSmith cartridge in a B&O linear tracking turntable, set up expertly for me by NikonGod, with a top-drawer phono stage/pre-amp (Hafler extensively modded by one of the best) vs. the SACD run thru a top-drawer DAC (Wadia).

 

So this was Analog vs. Digital at its finest, at least the best I can do. Either I had no preference, or the SACD won (lack of surface noise).  Maybe I did not clean the LPs well.  Maybe I did not level-balance correctly.  Maybe I fooled myself since the test was not blind.  Who knows?  But the SACDs sounded damn good.

 

Could it be that crummy solid state amps, and especially crummy DACs with strange sound signatures (like the one built in to my otherwise-wonderful Lyngdorf amp, OMG is it bad, or the one build in to my Senn Orpheus HEV90 amp, also terrible) make people thing that the digital CD is the enemy, when it is not (unless its a pop CD that entered the loudness battle).

 

The solid-state Beta 22 amp with decent high-impedance phones sounds excellent with well-mastered CDs, so it's not just tubes.

 

As someone in this thread said, it's all about mastering.  Anyway, I am going to sell my 2000+ LPs to some young man for a lot of money and for the next 20 years (I hope, at my age) listen to my CDs, either on the Waida or ripped with EAC and played back on a decent computer rig.


Edited by wavoman - 6/27/15 at 6:26pm
post #57 of 71

Analog recordings, played on analog media, is better, yes, as no number of bits of data can compare to a living wave. But, at this point even, I think digital quality is well beyond what human perception can pick up. Analog usually, due to the gear itself, generally has a "Warmer" tone to it, but analog being better than digital anymore, for human listening, is just objective. Personally, I think vinyl sounds better, and I like messing about with the gear, and all the customizing and such you can do with it, and I think the pops and clicks, and the hiss that tape also has, just make analog formats have character and life to them, whereas digital just sounds "Flat", "Dull", or "Dead" to me. It's too perfect, it doesn't sound like music :P But, just the opinion of an old soul, I guess.

post #58 of 71
My late uncle and my audio mentor, Ph.D ME, published, strongly believed in the superiority of the CD. And, yes, LPs sounded like crap on his plastic Optonica turntable - a noisy, crackly mess - in a system put together using "science." It sounded like mud. One day, listening at his house, I couldn't take it anymore and drove him to my place. Cue'd up the same album and let it rock. He sat there silently and then said, "But, this is a $10,000 turntable," as it suddenly modified his reliance on an incomplete understanding of aural science. He passed away shortly thereafter. RIP.
post #59 of 71

all signal chains are "information channels" and Shannon-Hartley Information Capacity Theorem applies - "analog" doesn't have "infinite" resolution there is the fundamental noise and bandwidth limit for any media

 

 

on raw information vinyl could beat CD if you allow for the extended bandwidth (but a decreasing levels, with higher noise) of recordings - Quadraphonic records recorded extra channels on a 30 kHz subcarrier

 

is there any working Quadraphonic phono playback setup in the world today? - would any Audiophile admit to listening to it?

 

 

but for delivered "conventional audio" 20-20kHz modern noise shaped, dithered CD has standard stereo LP vinyl playback beat on audible S/N, distortion and max signal level

 

I would still recommend doing stereo LP vinyl digital rips with 24/96 ADC though just for the extra headroom - it could then be normalized, decimated and dithered to 16/44 but that seems pointless given today's cheap digital storage


Edited by jcx - 7/1/15 at 5:07pm
post #60 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post

is there any working Quadraphonic phono playback setup in the world today?

Yes, tons of examples on FB vintage audio groups. Sorry.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Confused: Vinyl(Analog) vs Digital