2. analog
  3. 194290-5063

How much do I need to spend to make vinyl sound better than digital?

All,

I have a solid vinyl setup that I like to think of as entry-level “plus:” Project Debut Pro with Sumiko Moonstone cartridge.  I enjoy vinyl for the ritual but find that my digital gear - a $400 ifi streamer and the AKM DAC built into my Anthem preamp - beats the analog rig in most ways.  Far better imaging/soundstage and much tighter bass without the occasional distortion/sibilance/warbling of the vinyl rig.  I haven’t messed with cartridge setup other than to check the factory-performed alignment, which looks perfect.  The table is perfectly balanced, counterweight set correctly with an electronic scale, etc - so I have no reason to think there’s a setup problem.  
 

Is this par for the course for this level of vinyl gear?  What do I need to spend to get my vinyl gear to match the performance of decent digital?  I’m thinking of upgrading to a Clearaudio Concept, perhaps with a Hana SL cartridge, but I want to make sure doing that is going to deliver a fundamentally different experience than what I have right now with the Project/Sumiko combination.

 

No interest in flame wars or rehashing the vinyl/digital debate.  I know vinyl can sound wonderful and am simply trying to decide whether I can afford the price of entry for a system that can gets the basics right (no audible distortion/sibilance, decent imaging).  I thought the Project/Sumiko would have gotten me there, but for whatever reason it hasn’t fit the bill.Thanks for any insights. 

lousyreeds1

Showing 2 responses by gbmcleod

gbmcleod
565 posts
 

Did you mention you have a phonostage? I didn’t see any mention of one. So if you’re using a phonostage that’s internally contained within the turntable, then that could easily be why your digital setup sounds better. I find that most people, listening to popular music as they do, will think digital surpasses vinyl. But listen to a recording of a flute (an instrument i play), or any other well-recorded acoustic instrument and you will hear the difference between the two more easily, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the vinyl sound was closer to how a real flute sounds. Of course, that begs the question of how many listeners KNOW what acoustic instruments sound like. I get the impression that’s not the case. I mean, that the majority of people’s music is acoustic. Even if that, the ’80s produced the worst vinyl - and sound - of the 20th century. Vinyl was so thin you could flex it easily. NOT the case with an lp made in 1960.

So, If you are listening to  classical, I can imagine the vinyl sounding better. But if you listen to pop, rock and the rest of the musical genres, then I could see digital sounding better, since so much music is overly compressed and manipulated.

What do you listen to?

gbmcleod
565 posts
 

I might enjoy digital more than vinyl if I am listening to pop, or rock music. Processed as it is, I listen to it with all the over-engineered effects, and it sounds fine.

However, if I want to hear acoustic instruments in a symphony orchestra at its best, with a fully 3D soundstage, good imaging, and a fully musical presentation, I’ll listen to vinyl. And that goes for well-recorded jazz or blues (Bill Evans, Miles Davis, BB King) as well. And, if the record was made in the 60s or 70s, vinyl of that era sounds more musical and voices are more "human" sounding than on anything made after 1985. Music of the ’80s was canned, thin and largely, not particularly well-recorded.

More to discover