How much do you need to spend to get digital to rival analog?

mahjister,

To say that "imaging" in headphones is all in your head, would be completely accurate. There are many imaging cues that your auditory system has for localization that simply do not exist in headphones. That makes the rest of your assertions about imaging open to "interpretation".

Now, I am not saying You shouldn't like your NOS DAC. If it brings you audio nirvana great, stick with it.  I will even accept your Perception that the NOS DAC creates a 3-d holographic image.

What I won't accept is that the image it creates is accurate (or more accurate), or even that the sound coming out is a more accurate representation of the original.  A lightly filtered NOS DAC, as are being promoted today, create sounds that were not in the recording. There is no other way to put it. They create sounds that were not in the recording. Those sounds tend to create an "airy" feel that some will interpret as "3-d holographic imaging", while others will interpret it as "crap". Frequency range of hearing will have an impact on this.  mahjister, If you like it, does it matter why you like it?

By the way I want to know if 3-d holographic imaging in headphones or speakers, and natural musical timbre instrument and voices rendering is also the results of very old age with this NOS dac of mine? Let me guess that your answer will be "probably" ….:)

I’ve said this before, gentle readers, but I’ll say it again. By the time the signal gets out of the transport and goes to the DAC it’s TOO LATE. The damage has already been done! And it can never recover. Sadly, the Reed Solomon Error Correction Codes are NOT TOO GOOD for scattered CD laser light 💡 interference, seismic vibration interference, vibration produced by the CD transport and the self-inflicted vibration and flutter of the CD itself whilst spinning. 💿

atdavid

I dont believe that ANY reconstruction will be a total accurate simulation of the " original"... All engineering link in the audio recording chain is about trade-off and choices....But you judge too hastily and swiftly and make an implicit equation between the "holographic imaging" for some old guy educated ears, that must be only " crap" for young educated brain...But for my pleasure all that is of no avail because I enjoy tremendously my "illusion"... My best to you ...

Most music in the last several decades was recorded with DSD ADCs, then converted to PCM for mixing and mastering. Conversion from DSD(Delta-Sigma) to PCM and back is a mathematical process and if done with enough mathematical precision introduces no noise, losses, or distortion within the limits of useful audio, i.e. will be  bit perfect to 24 bits.

DSD is a different story since DSS native conversion is different than PCM and basically it's again more straightforward than delta-sigma PCM conversion. So DA converters with direct DSD DA conversion path (no conversion to PCM prior to DA) can benefit in sound since DSD conversion doesn't require output filter at all, so no ringing as well. However typical cheap DAC converts DSD to PCM, then processes DA as with ony other PCM signal.

Well one thing we can be 100% sure of is that GK will at some point make a post that is totally irrelevant to the topic at hand.

geoffkait18,240 posts11-14-2019 11:05amI’ve said this before, gentle readers, but I’ll say it again. By the time the signal gets out of the transport and goes to the DAC it’s TOO LATE. The damage has already been done! And it can never recover. Sadly, the Reed Solomon Error Correction Codes are NOT TOO GOOD for scattered CD laser light 💡 interference, seismic vibration interference, vibration produced by the CD transport and the self-inflicted vibration and flutter of the CD itself whilst spinning. 💿

And this I agree of wholeheartedly. It is the same with the ridiculous turntable/digital debate. Some people prefer what comes out of turntables, some prefer what comes out of DACs, and some prefer what comes out of NOS DACs, and whether what comes out is accurately portrayed or not for that listener matters exactly 0. There is no debate over whether these 3 things sound different. They do.  It is much different from the debate about whether a tweak does anything at all.

mahgister755 posts11-14-2019 11:13amBut for my pleasure all that is of no avail because I enjoy tremendously my "illusion"... My best to you ...

Geoffkait, My old Nakamichi Dragon is in a box buried under a lot of other boxes up in the storage room right where it belongs. To compare cassettes to Hi Res digital is like comparing moonshine to Remy Martin XO. 
Zalive, if you do not like the symbals on digital recordings just focus on the bass.
Mahgistar, exactly. So my solution to the problem is just have them both then you can decide for yourself. In my experience...it depends. 

If I were you I’d dig the Nakamichi out of the closet and find out what you’ve been missing. Tape is a natural medium. It breathes. 

Dear @tzh21y @zalive : """ I have never heard drums, cymbals and overall air sound right on any digital system................................
........as it sounds in say an orchestra hall. """

of course not, you can’t hear it that way not only in digital but in LP neither:

first because you can’t have the live music exprerience in true/real way in any room/home system and second ( between other reasons. ) becdause in a Hall your seat position maybe it’s at 20+ meters from the instrument source where the recording microphones pick-up the same information " seated " at near field: 1m-3m.

Now if you listen cymbals or drums seated at nearfield position and at real SPL those cymbals/drums will crush severely your whole body not only your ears and you can’t stay listened in that stage for more than 5 minutes, maybe less time before you will deaf for the years to come.

Microphones can support SPLs in excess of 130+dbs continuously.

Our ears follow a " protocol ":

https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/how-ear-works#top

and all those is only through our ears but we have to remember that we listen through the whole human been body: hair, skin nervous ends, muscle, bones and the like. Body has a lot of resources to listen almost anything. So, both of you as amghister too needs to live the live nearfield experiences with real MUSIC at real SPLs.

Btw, @geoffkait :: """ Tape is a natural medium. It breathes. """

natural medium?, maybe only for you. Breathes? certainly digital shares that characteristics in excess.

So what’s your point down there?, as a fact I don’t care about your answer but I can tell you that casettes is not the issue in this thread. Btw, I still own the Nakamichi 700ZXL:

https://audio-database.com/NAKAMICHI/player/700zx-e.html

beautiful and great vintage machine.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

of course not, you can’t hear it that way not only in digital but in LP neither:

first because you can’t have the live music exprerience in true/real way in any room/home system and second ( between other reasons. ) becdause in a Hall your seat position maybe it’s at 20+ meters from the instrument source where the recording microphones pick-up the same information " seated " at near field: 1m-3m.

It's all correct what you say, but differences between live sound and production/mastering plus reproduction applies to all the frequency range. Yet many report it's least credible in a HF range. Obviously it's not all related to mikeing and production, there are specific additional problems related to production and reproduction of a HF range.

Zalive, if you do not like the symbals on digital recordings just focus on the bass.

It's really complex, as reproduction is (the way I see/picture it) a multiplication of influences. What's unrealistic with the cymbals or other sounds located mainly in a HF range is a result of not only digital but as well the amplification. Shushurin said a long time ago that the main problem of dominantly used amplification topologies is a total distortion which rises with the frequency, so biggest issues with distortion is expected in a HF range. Bingo, that's where digital has its worst moments too. When distortion and distortion multiplies at some point it easily gets too much and psyhcoacoustics will react: HF becomes more pronounced and easily falls out of balance.

Why I'm saying this: if room acoustics (which is another issue) and amplification quality allows it, system is pretty tolerant to bit of misbehaving on the digital side as there's a headroom of quality reproduction after it and sound is easily full with nice timbre and definition accross the spectrum. So even if cymbals are not perfect it's not a big deal and it's easy to 'forget' it. However if issues multiply too much, you must do some heavy mental self-programming to forget all and enjoy :D and it's not what hi-fi should be about.

Many went to analog rigs I think as they didn't succeed in setting up a nice digital based sound. And it's not impossible to set up a really nice digital front-end system with rich, full and gentle sound. It requires care with the rest of the system, it requires quality amplification, paying attention to details and...if anyhow possible, a solid nice room acoustics (setting up speakers the correct way means 'earth and sky' difference). Because IMO it's the room acoustics which can bring too much focus on a 'digital sound', and make it more relevant than in some other circumstances. 

In the end it's really easy to forget the fidelity imperfection as long as you are able to get the tonal balance completely right. 

I have been at this for over 40 years and owned a Audiostore 
digital has come a long way , the recording has a lot to do with any 
playback , but apples to apples first using Vacuum tubes in digital is a big plus ,on a quality machine tubes distort with even harmonicsare more forgiving natural sounding to the ear ,that being said the Best Buy for the money and is excellent is the new 
Lampizator Amber 3 dac for under $3k none better ,                 enjoy the music.com gave it 5 stars across the board for music quality, instrumental is the cable .i have tried Every brand out there under $1500. Final touch audio Callisto is by far the best in bringing realism to the party. I sold my $6k PS audio dac for the Lampizator , I also bought the $500 Triode Digital power cord it made a very nice improvement all critical components ,and 
synergistic research New Orange fuse. They offer a money back 
trial on Everything including the dac .

As I stated before  key to getting digital right great digital design knowledge 
Lampizator, 2, vacuum tubes bring much more realism to the music ,
which too you can tune to your sonic taste. A top USB cable also is instrumental
i have compared  usb cables up to $1500 and the Final touch audio- Callisto 
is very natural and detailed and at $850 a bargain, and a good power cord.
even the new Lampizator Amber 3 entry lever around $3 k with cable
sound very good  and vinyl at the same price imo is not as good.

how much good ears and good brain cost?

Gallus, priceless.
Zalive, I can still hear fine up to 18 kHz.  I have had many issues with CDs over the years I suspect to various problems with links in the chain.
It is obvious from many albums such as The Trinity Sessions that digital recording can be excellent. I suspect it is the playback process that creates the issues you complain about. Having evaluated many recordings of which I have versions in both digital and analog formats I can say without question that in many circumstances the analog version sounds nicer due to the addition of euphoric distortions. When compared to live acoustic instruments the digital version is more accurate. In many instances that sense of air and depth that many of us, myself included like is due to added distortion. Many interpret that "air" as high end. I have many remastered Hi Res recordings (downloads) that over come the lack of euphoric distortion through thrilling dynamics and more accurate imaging. 
Making generalizations about any format is a mistake and more likely indicates a bias on the part of that individual. There are just too many steps along the way that when not done correctly can pervert the final product in any format.

Mike

Looking back, even BEFORE the Loudness Wars started, vinyl generally has higher dynamic range than its CD brethren. No bout a doubt it. You only need to look 👀 at the Dynamic Range Database to appreciate that. The other big advantage of vinyl, at least potentially, is frequency extension. I’d opine it’s extremely difficult to excavate the intricate data that is contained on CDs for a variety of reasons I’ve covered before many times. It’s a shadow of itself, or what it should be. For CDs, without a whole lot of effort, Air, Sweetness and fullness of bass are usually sub par. Even then.....

Except almost all vinyl in the last several decades has been digital right up to the cutting head. Pre-digital, most analog tapes and cutting head amps/systems had bandwidth limitations too, even if the theoretical cartridge limit was higher.


The dynamic range database is purely an indication of the mixing and mastering, nothing about the limits of the format.


Absent any proof, your points about CDs are just conjecture, the overall robustness shown in ability to store data shown in data CDs. The real time nature of audio called for different error correction but data CDs show that putting 650mb of data on a CD (similar to amount of audio data) and recovering it is possible. Either way streaming negates that.

Thanks much for the barrage of logical fallacies. Good job! 🤗 Streaming by most accounts is inferior in sound quality to plain old vanilla CD. But I’m sure you like the convenience, right? Which would make your streaming argument just another strawman argument. 😬 Also, I am not really interested in PROOF of anything, only EVIDENCE. It’s a subjective hobby. Get over it. You sound like Juror #3 in 12 Angry Men, You can’t prove it! 😡

Looking back, even BEFORE the Loudness Wars started, vinyl generally has higher dynamic range than its CD brethren. No bout a doubt it. You only need to look 👀 at the Dynamic Range Database to appreciate that. The other big advantage of vinyl, at least potentially, is frequency extension. I’d opine it’s extremely difficult to excavate the intricate data that is contained on CDs for a variety of reasons I’ve covered before many times. It’s a shadow of itself, or what it should be. For CDs, without a whole lot of effort, Air, Sweetness and fullness of bass are usually sub par. Even then...

I exchanged few comments with the local audio designer. He also has years of experience in studio production. He claims 24/48 which is practically used as a standard for many things today provides a real dynamical range which on a format level surpasses anything a vinyl can produce. As I understand the same is not true for 16/44.1, though.

The real difference happens in production/mastering. Practically anything on the digital side gets compressed when producing a master. There's an attractiveness associated with compression, too - with some music at least it may sound more attractive when compressed, especially on non hi-fi systems. Sad but true. However though compression is used commonly the level of compression is not the same on each record, of course. 

On another level, part of a dynamic nature is associated with reproduction device. Currently I use AD1865 based DIY NOS r2r DAC, and I can tell it made an immediate difference in dynamics of reproduction compared to few modern delta-sigma DACs, which according to their specs should not lack dynamics...

If I had known that analog was so much better than digital I would not have bought my dac and streamer.  I would have spent the money on vinyl! 

15k and up for a CD player that is almost as good as LPs not better.

I had pay peanuts for my dac and amplifier.... Peanuts for my speakers... My audio system sound quality is equal to most vinyl system under thousands of dollars....

This debate is non sense....Because way to much relative to the price /quality involved....

The key thing in audio are the controls over the 3 embeddings of the system, vinyl or digital one....

Sampling rate?
Analog is infinite.

mglik

Sampling rate?
Analog is infinite.

No, analog is not infinite. It's bandwidth limited, just like digital.

192, ad naseum
Not band width, sampling rate