How Good Can Digital Get?

newmanoc - quite a reasonable reply. thanks! i tend to be more or less in the same camp as your wife.

but, iffin yer a psychiatrist, shouldn't you go by newmanDOC?

:-)

Lugnut - the teres rocked! it really did. we all just have different things that distract from and/or draw us into a recording.

noise distracts me. i haven't heard a rockport or walker, so i can't say what they're capable of.

and, as far as software goes, it's much easier to find what i like on cd. cheaper, too and in better condition.

and i'd say that were i a classical music junkie, i'd keep the vinyl around, but that's not true, either. SACD has so many classical titles, that i still couldn't justify it.

plus, i should also mention this taboo - i have a high-res mltichannel setup and vinyl don't do surround. (and i ain't buying the 70's equipment for quad, either) cd doesn't, either, but SACD does. and the few times a multichannel recording is done properly - YOWZA!

see:
peter gabriel - up
roxy music - avalon
pink floyd - dark side of the moon
nine inch nails - the downward spiral

these are all, to me, so superior to the 2-channel versions such that i hate listening to them in stereo afterwards.

of course, this isn't to say that they're all good. some music just shouldn't be done multichannel.
see:
nick drake - a treasury
beck - sea change
james taylor - everything

and some music could have been good, but is ruined by a lousy multichannel mix
see:
bowie - all of the MC sacds. i haven't heard "heathen" in multichannel yet, but i do have high-hopes for it. it could be really good - that music lends itself to great MC done right.
t-rex - electric warrior

and merry x-mas back to yaz!

newmanoc -

"Although I was supposed to be paying attention to speakers, the only thing that kept running through my mind was "This sounds good, but I can't wait to get home and listen to some vinyl." When the source was changed from the CD 12 to an LP 12 turntable (w/ Lingo power supply and Ekos tonearm), I wanted to stay were I was for the rest of the afternoon."

can you not see how this could be attributed to psychology? you "know" that vinyl sounds better, and you're listening to speakers with digital. (shock!) they can't possibly sound their best with digital! you listen the whole time thinking that this could be better, so you don't really allow yourself to listen. so when the vinyl comes on, whether or not it does sound better, that little voice nagging at you that it could be better shuts up and then you start paying attention again and truly listening.

i'm not saying definitively that this is what's happening - just offering a possible perspective.

as i've said before - we often let our prejudices get the best of us. there are some prejudices in this industry so deeply ingrained that even if CDs were able to solve world hunger, bring peace to the middle east, give the US a fair and democratic election, change the catbox for me, deliver a mean blowjob, and sound better than vinyl while doing all of that, there would still be people saying "digital will never be as good." why? because that's what they're taught. it's the same thing with solid state vs. tubes. when poorly implemented, both have disadvantages. when well implemented, both can get past those disadvantages - so much so that it's impossible to tell one from another. yet there are still those who swear only one or the other is worthwhile.

oh, and other little things. like the dac 6 - it has to sound like shit because it has op-amps in the output stage, right?

yeah.

sounds LOUSY, let me tell ya.
(/sarcasm)

people should listen to hifi with their minds OPEN - but i know that this'll never happen which is a damn shame.

it makes me really want to manufacture a music cd with authentic needle-dropping noises, surface crackles and pops and play it to a vinylphile on a high-end cd-player with them blindfolded and hear them marvel over how great it sounds.

gendut3 - how do you figure? i've offered my argument - please indulge me by offering more than an unqualified statement.

gendut3 - having perused your posting history, it's quite apparent that you've mistaken me for a kettle, mr. pot.

yes, i have stated that i prefer high-quality digital and NO - i don't say that vinyl sucks. to my ears, i prefer the quiet background of digital. IMHO, the surface noise of vinyl obscures the details of a recording. this is ME and vinyl (analog) is still my reference. notice i say "digital is as good and in some cases better than vinyl" on my meitner gear. what does this imply? it means that vinyl is still my basis of comparison! vinyl sounds more fluid than bad cd. this, i admit. i like good digital because to ME it has the silence of digital with the fuidity of vinyl. i'd like high-end vinyl JUST AS MUCH if i could get it as quiet as a cd/sacd/dad/dvd-a.

YOU prefer the ease of analog, which i have found now with my cd player. i'm happy. you're happy. let's leave it at that and keep our minds open.

you may disagree with me ALL YOU WANT - but don't accuse me of having a closed-mind when you have no ability to back it up. especially when YOU are guilty of exactly what it was i was pointing out.

i'd invite anyody reading this to look at our respective post histories and judge for themselves who has the more open mind, sir.

gregadd - back when i had a vinyl setup (it was a Teres 265, an SME V arm and a Van den Hul Colibri Cartridge) i used a nitty gritty (which i still have) and borrowed a vpi for a while.

and they certainly helped, but they didn't eliminate the surface noise, unfortunately.

even pristine pressings were noisy - not distractingly so necessarily, but noisier than cd, anyway. and it obscures fine detail only in the same way that a fan buzzing in the room will, or the hum of an ac vent. it's not huge - just a bit perceptible and distracting.

oddly enough, though - tape hiss doesn't bother me nearly as much.

go figure.

:-)

Rsbeck - very well put. you articulated my sentiments better than i could. and a fun little anecdote, btw.