An interesting Digital vs. Analog experience


On Friday I visited my local hi fi store where Garth Leer of Musical Surroundings was showing off the new Clear Audio Master Innovation turntable and Jim White of Aesthetix was on hand with a lot of his gear. The speakers were Focal Stella with dual JL Audio Gothom subs. Obviously, the point of the event was the turntable, but I'll have to admit that when the music was temporarily switched from the turntable to a labtop both my friend and I thought the digital sounded better.

I've heard A/B comparisons in the store before using identical recordings and in that case preferred the vinyl, but this time with the recordings being different I would have left with a very different impression.

I mentioned it to Jim White (I didn't discuss it with Garth Leer since because I didn't want to rain on his parade) and his comment was that the system was tailored for analog so I'd probably really enjoy a system that was intended for digital. I think the computer was using an Aesthetix CD player for the DAC.

It was the first time in a long time that I was blown away with the sound of a system in that room, it made my system sound very humble (as it is in comparison) in a way that I had not heard before. It was the first time that I've heard Aesthetix amplification making the Focal Utopia's shine.

I guess what I'm saying is that both vinyl and digital can be amazing, but the difference in convienience is astounding.

I could see myself owning a pair of Stella speakers, but I don't think I have enough organs to sell to pay the bill. I doubt my wife would be willing to chip in...
mceljo

Showing 6 responses by bombaywalla

09-25-11: Tomcy6
Now you've done it Mceljo. You know it is politically incorrect to say that digital can sound better than vinyl. Off to the audiophile reeducation camp for you!
..........and they do not take any prisoners there!! ;-)
hope you have your as-strong-as-Captain-America shield ready. They are coming........
By the way, I don't think the name JM Labs applies to any of the new speakers, it's simply Focal these days.
you might already know this but your comment seemed to indicate otherwise hence a bit of history, if I may be permitted - back in the old days (which are not so old) Jacques Mahul (hence the JM) used to have to 2 separate outfits - one called JM Lab (singular) manuf speakers & one called Focal manuf drivers that went mostly into JM Lab speakers.At that time he also used to sell to other manuf & to a DIY market.
At one point he stopped selling his drivers on the open market & decided to internally use all his driver production & got rid of the JM Lab brand name. He consolidated the driver manuf & speaker manuf into one brand name called Focal.

Back in the JM Lab speaker days (which are early 2000 era days) there used to be the JM Lab Electra series - 846, 836 & 826 (smallest) which I heard. Very unimpressive sound. Many of us who heard these speakers unanimously agreed that the company should stick to driver manuf only & that it had gotten quite good at wood finishing but speaker design was not their forte. The last time I heard a Focal speaker was 4 yrs ago (I did like the sound of that one model which used Berrylium tweeters) but I do not know what they sound like today.....
But what gripes me more than anything is when someone claims a Dual TT is as good as good digital.
it sure can be Orpheus10 if you know how to set it up. Of course, not every Dual TT is better than good digital (whatever you definition of "good digital" is). Add to Dual TTs restored Lenco, vintage Thorens & the famous Technics 1200 turntables. You need to know how to set it up....
(if you are going to gripe that vinyl is too high maintenance in general or too high maintenance for you in particular, you won't find me counter-arguing that w/ you!)
"the price performance ratio is absurd, especially when analog can cost as much as a Greyhound bus”

and what is the DCS scarletti stack ? $70K ? Wow...amazing how a $20K turntable setup (well sorted) will smoke the DCS.
just to be clear: I do not have an axe to grind. I have both analog & digital & know which one is better for me.
The point of my reply is to further enhance Rockitman's post who has already pointed out that Orpheus10's shallow post (shallow 'cuz he did not do any research to find out prices of hi-end digital gear) is shallower than shallow!
Besides the dCS stack, add the EMM Labs gear, Wadia CD players, Reimyo digital gear, top-of-the-line Lavry digital gear, top-of-line Audio Note UK gear & the blooming list goes on & on......
The price of admission for that quality digital gear (which precisely the gear that has given you the experience & feeling that it rivals &/or bests analog) is no less than a Greyhound bus!

If you want to make a statement like that Greyhound bus one, atleast make it hold some water......
.....if the reason is because it was not built for digital. If a person builds and refines a system strictly for digital,.......

Rockadanny, what is the meaning of these statements? How does one build a system with a slant towards digital OR a slant towards vinyl....
as opposed to building a system that is designed to bring out the best of the recorded music no matter which format??
Thanks.
10-06-11: Mceljo
Bombaywalla - Considering that a carefully built system requies "synergy" from the source to the speakers including all associated cables ....

Mceljo, I trust that by "synergy" you mean
* connecting 2 pieces of electronics that you can afford within your budget by the 'best' cable that you can afford that harmonizes with the compromises made within those particular pieces of electronic equipment

right?

I do not believe that synergy has much to do with sound but has a lot to do with matching the impedances between 2 pieces of gear (and good/better/best sound is the end result when the impedances between 2 pieces of gear are correctly matched). I.E. taking care of the electrical interface bwtn 2 pieces of gear.

ANd, this "synergy" thing might be a separate discussion topic....