+1
The components rendering the sound determine output, not the storage format… well, unless it is really low resolution (MP3).
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?
124 responses Add your response
Some people just have trouble with the concept of of individual differences. No one will argue with the idea that digital does not sound right to you inna, but our ears, brains and experiences are all very different. SACD has become the format of choice for classical for many people. |
“Good quality digital components serve me exceptionally well” Likewise, my experience been very similar. Digital or Analog, all it takes is one’s commitment and carefully put together quality components to replicate ‘live’ music from physical media or streaming. |
Well I listen to live music performances often. 4 such outings in the past 7 weeks. I classical (Piano and cello) 3 jazz . All 4 were small venues and un-amplified. We also have a piano in our living room. So I’m no stranger to live acoustic instruments. Good quality digital components serve me exceptionally well. However I do understand and respect the idea of “to each their own “. Charles
|
It is always relative.... Put the best tape in a bad room and install a digital system in a room acoustically tuned for it and you will choose the digital system... What is best did not exist out of all possible specific acoustic conditions...It exist theoretically or on a top of the game dedicated acoustic room coupled to a top of the game amplifier and speakers... And yes mikelavigne said also that tape is top if i recall right... I trust him.... But for almost everybody this does not means they must buy a tape recorder at all.....😁😊
|
No one needs 180g records, by the way, this is BS. In any case, nothing can match tape at its best, and this will continue for a foreseeable future. After that we all will get brain implants and will not care. That's where it's seemingly going. Digital recording can 'look' good at first glance, but if you are familiar with live sounds and have a good ear you will agree with my statement. Not a single note right. |
My experience varies
I started to listen to digital 5 years ago and I enjoy the access and variety of music versus my album collection. As I upgraded I predominantly listen to digital yet analog is a special event so I invested in the analog chain to be high quality (I would say sub-reference level) just like my digital source. I agree with others that an excellent digital source is a bit easier to build and if I didn't own 300 records (most bought in the 80-90s) I would have focused on digital only. |
The first home of ignorance is our "tastes" the last home of ignorance is our "habit".... Exploring and listening experiments is the way... Our taste dont matter so much, we must play with them and not dying with only them...... Analog or digital choices are only taste and habit, going out exploring with acoustic and psycho-acoustic, make them what really they are : only mere tools... They are one chosen taste only because of ignorance or because our limited experience most of the times... |
If that’s your outcome with digital, then so be it. Yours is the antithesis of my experiences and listening to digital components and music reproduction. Fortunately for those who are dissatisfied with digital, there remains a plethora of analogue options. Thus, we all can be musically happy. Charles |
People dont understand that engineering is not sound, acoustic/-psycho-acoustic has more impact than the choice of relatively good and equivalent piece of gear, and explain sound...Electronic engineering dont explain sound at all...Electronic engineering use discoveries in acoustic and neuro -acoustic... Nevermind digital or analog, silence or music is neither digital nor analog, it is an acoustical/ neuro-acoustical fact... People really believe that the sound comes from the gear alone because of marketing not from the acoustic settings of ROOM also and from their brain correlating each ear.... Pieces of gear matter, yes, way ,way less than your brain/room/speakers correlated dynamic... Picking a dac or a turntable matter way less...Pick a good one for sure either a dac or a turntable....But nowadays dac are more pragmatic choice, and no more behind analog...
|
I started streaming with a AudioQuest Dragonfly Cobalt. I'm impressed with the sonics of it. Tremendous soundstage. I'd say it beats my analog setup 70% of the time. Analog investment going into the preamp is roughly $5500 (TT, cartridge, stylus, phono preamp.) The Dragonfly is $330! I do have some have some albums that beat what I've been able to find streaming. In the end, I love vinyl and probably will still seek out particular albums to add to the collection. Streaming is great to listen to music that I'm not sure I want to add to the vinyl collection. I think it will keep the volume of records in check so I don't have walls of vinyl records. The collection is all killer and no filler! |
It may be helpful to clarify what genres of music we are talking about. I understand the point about realism when trying to recreate sitting at an unamplified piano recital. I don't understand the point about realism when trying to recreate the sound of listening live to electrically amplified guitars, bass, drums and vocals through microphones all coming out of a PA system. What is realistic in the latter context? For those genres, it's just about the preference of which distortions you like better. But I agree, just enjoy that we have both! |
| Post removed |
I had a $75 analog set up and my digital gear with diy streamer and commercial DAC (together $16) equalled, sometimes bettered, analogue. However LPs that were recorded in analogue eg 50s, 60s, 70s jazz were generally preferred depending on the mastering. Modern vinyl was usually a waste of time, the digital source easily matched and often outstripped the vinyl unless it had been produced as an all analogue item. Unless you want to purchase AP remasters 33rpm or 45 rpm ( I have most of the originals I want on vinyl anyway) digital is probably all you need. No matter how good a system you have, the quality of the recording influences the final outcome, poor recordings can sound better but inevitably the software governs the hardware and final outcome.
|
Often stated here is that between Vinyl or analogue which sounds 'natural', but what 'natural' do you mean. I had a hifi nut professor at uni who I kept in touch with for some years. To him his Klipsch speakers, Leak amplifier and Garrard 401 / SME sounded 'natural', it never did to me. What he meant by 'natural' was how that system sounded. Everything else was not 'natural'. The guy at Zero Fidelity coined a phrase, "which fake do you want". All hifi is fake even the very best, and I have listened to $500K worth and it is still not at all like live, in my mind actually much better, the live experience is better but not the sound. So which is the best fake 'natural'. The one you like. To me the slightest pop or crackle on vinyl total ruins the experience, the slightest sound of a mis track stops me listening to the music, so no vinyl for me I'm afraid. Is digital perfect? Yes its perfectly digital playback, you may enjoy perfect vinyl playback, just enjoy the fake you like best, or both if you like the difference. |
@rvpiano The Deccas are listed in Systems in more detail. Basically modded Super Gold and Golds. |
Digital/analog arguing are children play... The truth is any sound/musical experience, is not only related to a format, but to acoustic/psycho-acoustic conditions specifically created for example for this turntable or for this dac in an idealized room adapted for each one ... Which is the better? Then because each experience with any specific system will differ at all price scale, and will differ much in different embeddings working dimension, it is up to anyone choice... Sound engineering is an art based science...Not only a technology.
I prefer digital, for practical reason , and in low cost system the difference between the two seems minute one to me... But it was very difficult to buy a good low cost dac for my ears.... I was lucky....
«What is the sound of an unconnected off dac out of any room ? Sure it is perfect sound»- Anonymus engineer |
Weird to have this discussion in 2022. Should be obvious digital is a far superior formar. Should also be obvious that the final recorded product is far more important and why we often prefer the vinyl version. Then again what poorly setup vinyls systems are covering up other flaws :-) Audiophiles can't handle the truth though, that's why most don't even try to get to the bottom of the issues they perceive they are having. Strange hobby. It's like running a 12 second quarter but telling yourself every day you ran a 10.5 :-) |
@rvpiano System dependant? My analog end in one system is absolutely more finely etched than my digital. Decca cartridges and ESLs will do that! |
Given the fact we have had CDs since the 80’s and DACs exist along side analog ....we all have the best of both worlds. Life is grand. It’s like having a Ferrari and Lamborghini in your garage and asking which is best??? You can drive either one of them because they are both THERE. Here is the kicker. Can you get good sound from a budget analog system? yep Can you get good sound from a budget digital system? yep Can you get great sound from a high $$$ analog system? yep Can you get great sound from a high $$$ digital system? yep Can I buy both? Yes
|
Uh, no. You pick one process without discussing the other - the retrieval of music from squiggly grooves, conversion to an EMF, filtering out of subsonic and supersonic interference, noise and distortion inherent to the plastic qualities of vinyl. You don't get to pick and choose what you pay attention to. And since most albums are now mastered digitally, even your shorter path is not necessarily valid. G
|
Melm, It’s not that the space is sharper, it’s, as you say, the notes are more distinct in digital. As far as being able to do a lot better on the digital side, the representation is very natural, just not as rounded. If anything, it’s objectively more real sounding, less idealized than analog. The addition of the Benchmark DAC really made my system come alive. The coordination of the the tubed and recapped Conrad-Johnson preamp with the very accurate Benchmark really is an ideal match. |
To an extent I agree, but again definitely exceptions existed. When I had a turntable I often compared records and CDs of the same titles. In some cases the LP was better sounding. In some cases they were pretty much equal. On a few occasions the CD sounded better than the corresponding LP. So in my experience it seems that the recording’s quality is as big a determining factor as is the recording format. Charles |
It's hard to wrap my mind around a space being sharper. Perhaps you mean that the edges of notes are more distinct on the digital side. While you use an excellent phono cartridge, a MM does soften things up a bit compared to a low output MC. But then you'd have to compensate for its lower output. By your own description your analog side outperforms your digital side in ways that are important to you. Most of your system is shared by both sides. However, if you read Goldensound's review of your DAC it sounds very much like what you've described. My personal bias is to look directly at hardware. In analog you have, IIUC, an excellent phono stage with tubes and powered with an LPS. On the digital side, once you get by the digital manipulation, you have an analog section consisting of op-amp chips. These typically have a lot of feedback. And it's powered by a switch mode ps. I think you can do far better on the digital side. |
In the early ‘80s I shared a house with an amateur recordist who had a collection of tapes made on a modified ReVox A77 with a dbx 224 compander NR unit. They were documenting a local orchestra that was very good, and the recordings were totally uncompressed live to 2 track with the best Nakamichi Tri-mic Omni capsules. These tapes were FAR better sounding than any commercial LPs even played on my SOTA Sapphire with Dynavector Ruby and PS Audio preamp, which was pretty good then. Then he switched to a Nakamichi PCM processor and Betamax using the same front end. Remarkably little changed. We even did a live vs. digitized event with a chamber ensemble and there was no definable difference. |
My preamp has the ability to run both a standard rectifier and full wave rectifier. I tried the standard one first then tried the full wave. I initially preferred the standard rectifier. It sounded more detailed/etched...cleaner? Actually sounded digital-like. The full wave rectifier sounded smoother, softer and less etched and detailed. I put on a familiar track and note carefully listened to the sound and every bit of high detail was present in the full wave rectifier. It just had a level of density and smoothness that the standard rectifier didn't. After some time, I realized the full wave rectifier was better for me. For me, LPs are like this. In my system digital is quite good sounding and sometimes better sounding than my LP playback system. But overall, with digital, I'm never alarmed by the realism during certain musical moments. I only get those occasional surprising moments with LP... despite the many issues (noise, pops etc).
|
melm, That’s a very good question. Although objectively the space around the instruments is better and sharper with digital, I can’t say it sounds more real than records. I get a fuller sound and more sense of involvement listening to records. And, paradoxically, a wider soundstage with records as well. |
Highest resolving and natural systems I've heard were multiples of $100k, practically that much on vinyl setup alone. Those systems and my aural memory of them has long been the reference for my home systems. IME not extremely difficult to get pretty high levels of resolution, transparency from digital, the issue is attaining the same level of natural timbre, timing, spaciousness that I've heard with the very best vinyl. At the level of vinyl I'm speaking of you're getting every bit and more of the resolution and transparency of digital, but you also get a certain feeling of relaxing into the music along with the extreme resolution/transparency. While digital is closing rapidly on this front, I still think some work needs to be done.
Another issue with determining a general sense of digital's potential is how highly variable streaming setups can be. Streaming noise floors and systematic induced jitter may hinder dac potentials. I fully expect with further innovations in streaming hardware and software, digital will continue to close the gap on the finest vinyl setups.
As for my own vinyl setup, I fullly expect I'll never reach the level of vinyl reproduction I'm talking about here, digital is the future for me. |
Looking at your components, it’s not hard to see that the SQ may not be converging as between digital and analog as you may wish. What you haven’t told us is which sounds more to you like real instruments in real space. After all, that's the real test. I’m guessing from your various posts that you listen to unamplified music a lot. I do find enough convergence in my own set-up that it is hard to choose for SQ. But the advantages on the digital side are undeniable. |
I have to say you nailed it with this observation. This has precisely been my listening experience. Many of the jazz labels from the 1950s-1960s if remastered with care and skill will sound natural and wonderful. So much sucess is dependent on the recording itself. For an example, Contemporary Records (Old school west coast jazz label) Prestige, Riverside etc. Just to mention a few to add to your list. Their Redbook CDs sound absolutely beautiful and engaging via my CD transport and DAC pairing. I think some digital components chase the detail aspect too much and miss the forest (Naturalness) for the trees (over emphasized artificial detail)). But without question there are some very capable and well implemented digital components that will get the job done in an exceedingly musically -realistic accomplished manner. Charles |
