Can you imagine a world without vinyl?

Dear Richard: +++++ " Can you imagine a world without vinyl? " +++++

Yes, I can imagine what I can't imagine is a world without MUSIC ( somebody posted about ).

50K records in 45 years?, that's mean that for 45 years you buy at least 3 records each single day over those 45 years!!!!!!!. You are a extremely music/record collector. Congratulations!!!!!! I own only 6K but normally I'm around 200-300 ( maybe less ) to hearing.

Now, it is obvious ( like other of you posted ) that we need a better medium/way of music home reproduction for the future recordings. I agree that for what are already recorded the LP is the best medium/way till today and I think that the LP reproduction audio items ( that we know/using ) most be improved ( because it can ), we are losting yet " music " from/in our audio systems, there is ( fortunately ) a " road " to improvements in the way of sound reproduction ( like somebody posted ) with better future designs ( I hope that. ): cartridges/tonearms/TT's/Phonolinepreamps/amplifiers/speakers/etc/etc.

Let me tell you these: over the last 30 years I don't know any single tonearm design ( and there are several very good today designs out there ) that could beat " vintage " tonearms designs like Micro Seiki MAX 282, Technics EPA 100MK2, Audiocraft AC3300, Lustre GST 801, SAEC, SME, etc, etc. In the same way we have very good cartridges new designs, but a real whole improvement over some " vintage " cartridges?, I can tell you, too, that ( unfortunately ) these new designs are not whole better than the older ( some cartridge manufacturers have better cartridges today but are better because their old designs were not good enough. ): I can't think/know any single today cartridge that could beat ( whole ) the Fidelity Researh MC702 or the Technics U205CMK4 ( MM ) or the Goldbug Brier or the Audio Technica ATML 180OCC or Micro Acoustics MA630 or Fulton HP or many others.
In the same way are the TT's, example: Micro Seiki, not only the top of the line SZ-1TVS+SZ-1M but the SX or RX series: IMHO I don't know any today TT ( and I don't hear all yet ) that really beats the Micro Seiki stuff.

Today, we all are paying " dream money " for tonearms/cartridges and TT's that give us/return a very small real " satisfaction " for what we invest on it and certainly almost all can't give us/return a real whole improvement over the very old " vintage " gear. Please, if you don't believe in what I'm saying: you can buy ( today ) on e-bay a MM cartridge ( new. ) like the Empire EDR.9 for less than HUNDRED DOLLARS ( they are on special!!: two cartridges for 135.00 dollars !!!!!) give 50 hours of play and then make a serious " hearing " from it, you can't believe how a MM cartridge for that " absurd " price could perform that nice!!!!! and at almost the very same level of any of those 3-5K new cartridge designs.

We have to ask/push/beg to the " new " TT/cartridge/tonearm very good designers to improve ( a real/big improvement ) their today designs. I think that we have to let to applaud with so paramount enthusiasm those every day newcomers designs till they be a real/whole quality sound reproduction improvement design, not only different but whole better.

In less proportion, we have to ask/push/beg to all the very good electronics and speaker designers. Why do you think that José and I work hard for many years to design/build our Essential 3150 phonolinepreamp? and why do you think that we are on the amplifier and tonearm design?: because we really think that we need a serious improvement in the quality sound reproduction of what we have and of what it is out there, we are trying it and we hope we could achieve that in the near future.

If we take a look in the last years the prices on the audio items go really fast ( higher ) against the quality improvements: the audio item price wins the " race " ( right now ), it is fair that we ( all customers ) ask for better audio item quality performance.

Last but don't less important is that the whole recording process could " suffer/change " for the better with new recording approaches: miking/mastering/edition/recording machines/cables/consoles/mixers/recording enginnering/producers/etc/etc. This subject is critical because is the SOURCE. I think that the recording manufacturers can do it but they are not interested on it, unfortunately.

Waiting for a better future!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Zaikesman: +++++ " reaping the benefits of rich boys wanting to play with new toys; that's what the high end is all about. " +++++

I respect your point of view but I think that you really don't know nothing about, you don't know what " moves " almost all of us about LP/analog reproduction. First you have to understand these before you go on.

+++++ " records cannot faithfully transmit the sound of a mastertape. Digital has that possibility, as well as more " +++++

I respect your point here but you don't know nothing about: till today analog or digital can't transmit the sound of a mastertape and the " possibility " is on the digital and analog too.

This is what I posted on other thread:

+++++ " I don't think that your question: +++++ " Is Digital actually better than Analog? " +++++, could have a precise answer because both mediums are totally different and you can't compare apples with bananas or a car with an airplane: it does not have sens.

Today, both mediums have its own advantages and disadvantages and both can live together in an audio system and we can use it often depending our CD or LP priorities.

95% of the recorded music comes through CD technology and this fact tell us that it does not matters about CD vs LP if we want that music then we have to buy CD and we have to have a decent CDP, no question about. " +++++

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear friends: I already posted my answer to the thread and some thoughts about.

The thread goes to the " never end " CD vs analog debate about which is better. Thinking on this subject I think that there are some different " areas " where we can analyse which medium is better, example: if we take which medium is more accurate ( I mean which one reproduce with the less deviation what was recording. ) perhaps we could say that the CD is better within its own frequency range, let " see " it:
in the analog sound reproduction the signal " suffer " two heavy degradation first the recording equalization ( RIAA ) and second the inverse equalization in the phonolinepreamp, the bigger problem here is that the inverse equalization that must be a mimic from the original ( the one that was in the recording ) is not really a true mimic: exist deviations where we lost the original recording frequency response, this inaccuracy is one of the imperfection subject in the analog medium.
Other subject is the cartridge frequency response where exist big deviations from the original recording due to the frequency deviations on the cartridge response: the best cartridges have, no better than, +,- 1db 20 to 20Khz in ideal play conditions ( not in our analog rigs ), this goes against the accuracy in the signal reproduction.
Then we have other subjects that preclude accuracy on the analog sound reproduction: record warps, rumble, woow and flutter, step-up transformers, necessity of high gain phonolinepreamps with out noise/distortions, the necessity to make a perfect cartridge set-up: VTA/VTFAS/AZ and the perfect tonearm match, the " sound/noises " that are not on the recording and that the cartridge generate when the stylus touch and " play " in the vynil, the LP suffer a degradation each time we play it, etc, etc.

What happen in the CD/digital medium: well there exist too two process where the signal " suffer " some degradation ( in lesser range than the analog one because is very dificult to " loose " bits with today digital technology ), analog to digital and then digital to analog , of course that the signal has some " problems " between all the process in the digital domain ( like hitter/clocking/etc ) but at the end of the " day " the final signal that we are hearing is more accurate to the original signal than in the analog medium.
Through the digital medium the signal " suffer " less degradation than in an analog medium, inclusive the digital medium does not need a phonolinepreamp because it could be connected directly to the amplifiers: the digital medium is more " clean " than the analog one.

From this point of view IMHO the digital medium is a lot better than the analog one.

Why then many of us preffer the analog over digital? ( other that we own a lot of LP's ), with all the analog imperfections and inaccuracies it has, at least, one advantage: frequency response wider range than the digital one, specially in the high frequency range. Here it is the digital Aquiles heel and here is almost the great differences in what we heard through analog against digital.
The digital promoters choose 16 bits for this medium and this resolution bits along with the 22.05kHz on the frequency response ( where the digital medium has to use filters to cut the high frequency response ) against 50kHz in the analog medium and this fact makes the difference. That's why we hear the silver records agressive, metalic, cold, with out " soul ", etc, etc.

Unfortunatelly the 24/192 digital technology almost disappear because no body ( other that a very small group of people that cares about music and cares about quality sound reproduction: like us. ) cares about quality sound reproduction, but this 24/192 digital technology ( specially the DVDA ) has nothing to envy to the analog one and in some areas surpass with easy the analog medium.
Yes, I think that this technology is superior to the analog one not only like technology it self but in the quality sound reproduction.

With all the inaccuracies that the analog medium has we like it more than the Redbook ( is a lot better in sound reproduction quality. ), as a fact we like the analog beautiful " colorations " and this is all about.

Till we don't have a true commercial 24/192 digital technology the analog one will be the better one in quality sound reproduction and I think that the analog stay here for ever or at least till we own LP's.

What we need is to " push " to the analog manufacturers devices to make a better design efforts to give us a better audio devices performers.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Gregm: You can't go further than 24 bits. The differences could be in how you use this 24 bits technology.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Eldartford: In the digital domain we can work almost at any bit level: 32/64/128/etc/etc, there is nothing that can stop about, the problem is in the analog domain where we have a serious limitations, example: a resolution of true 24 bits needs a dynamic range of 144db and 32bits a dynamic range of 192db: there is no single digital player and analog preamp that could achieve that kind of dynamic range.

The best today preamps ( I don't know any digital player ) has around 125-130db on dynamic range ( btw, the Essential 3150 has 131db. ), this means 20 to 22 bits. So, it is almost imposible to achieve 24 bits on analog: yes, the analog domain is the whole problem, dynamic range and noise.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.