@deludedaudiophile , It is what people come up with to supplant knowledge that I find most interesting. We do not like voids. We fill them in with .....mythology.
Analog vs. digital
I’ve found that on my system the digital side is more finely etched than the analog side. Both sound great in their own way, but records just don’t sound so finely defined.
What is your experience?
Showing 3 responses by mijostyn
@deludedaudiophile , the mysticism of ignorance. |
@ghdprentice , Come on! You know that was staged:-) It is an odd set of circumstances. For an absolute fact, digital reproduction has a much better signal to noise level and distortion that is at least an order of magnitude if not two less than analog. I have at least 100 albums in both analog and digital form and I would say that it is an even split as to which I prefer. However I can tell instantly which program source I am listening to. As a generalization what I have noticed is that analog sources have a heightened ambience in relation to digital which makes the soundstage seem deeper as if more echo was added to the master. I can hear why people like this even though it is artificial. When asked I will tell people who have not started an LP collection not to bother with analog. It is expensive and a PITA. They are better off putting their money into digital equipment and music. Those of us with large collections have to make the most of it and SOTA analog reproduction is very seductive. In my system that amounts to $35,000 in analog equipment alone! |