Has anyone been able to define well or measure differences between vinyl and digital?

G’day MikeyDee

My wife and I had the opportunity to attend a small Mozart chamber orchestra in the castle in Salzburg Austria a few years ago. That’s where sitting close within 6-15ft the small audience had a wonderfully intimate experience of dynamic range. No Hi-Fi experience can reproduce that intimate experience in a double thick stone castle, huge rectangular room with pillars etc.

Since this is also an exposé of human pleasure and pain, we should understand these systems too. Here’s a starter reference.

Thanks to all for a civil conversation here. Jitter, distortion, noise and mid and high frequency performance that seems to align with natural hearing sensitivity are raised as axis of differences.

Other issues emerge in this conversation such as phase shift pre echo vs pre ringing, and so on. I’ve always wondered how bass interacts with our hearing to subdue and enhance the listening experience. Good bass (whatever that is) seems to support subjective listening and hearing of music as if it carries the whole tune, although in many live situations it doesn’t carry so much as it supports yet remains individually separated.

System synergy for one or the other source is a new insight for me.

And noise itself, which may be frequency related or across the board can surely have differential effects, on hearing and listening. For those sensitive to clicks and pops an absolute distraction from the vinyl listening experience at times.

Thanks Eric and all others here.

There is an almost immediate recognition but probably not foolproof double blind test differential between these two formats, isn’t there? The apparent open spaciousness and feeling of lightness airiness not on all tracks probably but in general to vinyl that isn’t the same in digital.

These are instantly recognizable at least in enough cases that some here have agreed with the proposal. Not better, just different. Like was said earlier, better is a judgment of experience and that’s not my point here.

Its trying to describe and understand the differences.

Of course direct comparisons between tracks with same version is probably as close and discernible situation to hear those differences in. I’m sure there are YT example and experiments you can do at home. [Youtube limits aside, obviously]

One of my reasons for asking is to poll our knowledge on this topic and hear the common and different perspectives of this topic. I see some common and divergent knowledge already.

Video below points to a number of measurements differences

Good description of differences between Vinyl and Digital

@wturkey do you have a link?

G’day @thespeakerdude An esoteric question I admit, just wondering if 2 channel speakers present digital and analog audio in the same way or do the different audio profiles get presented in different ways by the same speakers/system? Maybe system dependent.

And I’m sad to say that Auro3D looks gone before it had a chance to grow. This format used less speakers to create a solid immersive experience. Shame Dolby didn’t buy it.

Is the impact of 2 channel speaker systems equal for either source?

Regarding Atmos as a multi source format, I wonder how robust it is vs say binaural recording playback. My impression also is that Auro3D is more ‘immersive’ and therefore more accurate in capturing natural environments. 

Oth ambiophonics offers another method of playback that reveals the power of certain types of immersive systems.

Ambiophonics reference

@fair

Ref: your long tech commentary and explanation above.

This is the single best explanation I’ve (ever) heard.

Thanks for taking the time to write this here.

Just read this lighter version towards the maths and physics of these two formats:

Scientific American 2017 article 

There seems to be competing explanations of the recording file format characteristics. This is a maths and physics question and should be able to be resolved.

Then there are subjective experiences and these are equally conflicting. There are areas of agreement such as higher or airier mid-range of vinyl and the less noisy cd format and some agreement of SACD as better than cd.

Ideas like some music styles may better suit certain formats better, classical with vinyl for example depend on technology justification that isn’t yet fully accepted.

On the other hand, the civility in this conversation despite differences has been glorious and I hope that we can continue this way.

Thanks for the extensive explanations of digital audio and references @thespeakerdude

Can we now summarize (are we there yet?) and identify general principles that help shape the differences between these two formats. I’m not interested in which one is better, as judgments are too system and context as well as music and preferences dependent.

Rather, can we draw conclusions about their differences that are more or less general or specific conclusions (about dynamics, freq range, noise and noise floor, PRAT, mid or high freq airiness and so on or our hearing preferences, sensitivities and limits) that shed light on common experiences?

I just watched Paul at PS Audio say how what MOFI was doing recording using DSD was in his view the right way to record and preserve masters in digital and then transfer onto vinyl for playback. Is vinyl playback giving anything different to digital playback from the same master copy?

[MOFI Marketing representations aside. I don’t want to touch the Marcoms involved here in this discussion.]

This has been one of the deepest technical discussions I’ve read on Audiogon. Thanks to Fair and TheSpeakerDude for sharing their viewpoints here.

I watched the video posted earlier to explain digital and that helped me to understand some of these recent expositions.

@Fair can you summarize on this issue?

I know especially if it’s a MOFI…

Yet it sounds different often, not always but often enough for me and many others to notice it.

That said I was just trying to understand why…

Hi there.

I’d like to ask @fair & @thespeakerdude to disengage from your conversation with each other. You have reached an impasse where no greater value is being added either to my original questions or each other’s position.

Again I want say thanks to both for your energy and effort to address the technical aspects of these questions.

But honestly, I learned somethings from each of you, and I respect you for maintaining civility. I ask that you and we need to move on. Please.

Id like to hear more diversity of thoughts and experiences here.

Lots more here to read and discover. Give us some time to explore these. 

Read this morning: https://aestheticsforbirds.com/2021/04/07/an-audio-professionals-take-on-vinyl/

Very good summary of this discussion from a layman’s perspective. Covering the two formats and recording chains. I especially appreciate the descriptors used, warmth, richness, and depth. 
If I wasn’t using my mobile right now I’d copy the definitions here to promote a common language for discussion of the differences between these formats.

I can only recommend reading this paper.

The academic research papers are a different kettle of fish.

My posting issue was not vinyl versus digital except in as much as they are different, and can be use as comparators. Not better. The diversity of situations from recording to playback are very clearly well described in the article from thatspeakerdude that I cited above this morning. I agree that we are looking for progress in this conversation not walls or reverse cycles.

In the playback domain, it is amusing cleeds, that audiophiles, me included work so hard to reduce distortions when each format has distortions of various impacts, some desirable in some situations and others perverse. From tubes to rooms, from vibration to EMI/RFI, the playground is full of hazardous pursuits.

Again though to my OP, I was focused on the warmth, depth and richness as basic identifiable differences between the two formats. Not always, but generally. And we seem to have made some progress in elucidating the circumstances of these differences in the recording and playback chain.

Flaws, like beauty, are in the eye (or the screen) of the beholder.

This is the first exhibition of references combining components and human hearing.  I hope that’s what this is…

@Fair good job converting your experience (thinking, research etc) and perspectives (paradigmatic, structured, exploratory etc) here. Progress…

The phono cartridge?!

Here’s a recent demo comp of these formats from Suncoast Audio

Test

We are a very long way off perfection in any dimension here. Every format recording and playback has imperfections. Perhaps you can be more specific?

My reason for posting this link was to stimulate discussion.