Is Digital actually better than Analog?


I just purchased an Esoteric DV-50s. The unit is fantastic in the sense that you can hear every detail very clearly in most recordings. Here is the thing, does it make for an enjoyable musical expereince? With this type of equipment, you can actually tell who can actually sing and who can really play. Some artist who I have really enjoyed in the past come across as, how shall I put it, not as talented. This causes almost a loss of enjoyment in the music.
Which comes to my Vinyl curiousity. I dont own a single record, but I have been curious why so many have kept the LP's (and tubes for that matter) alive for so long after the digital revolution and now I am thinking it is probably has to do with LP's being more laid back and maybe even more musical. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Would someone recommend going back to Analog. I was thinking of getting a entry level player like a Scout Master.
musicaudio

Showing 5 responses by mikelavigne

i recently swore off digital verses vinyl threads. i took the 12-step 'cure' (compared 12 Lps to digital). who the hell cares what anyone thinks anyway.

you guys have fun.
Musicaudio; point taken. if i could remove the "who the hell cares' sentence i would. it's not 'like me' to post in that way.

i have posted likely a few hundred posts just here on the 'goN regarding this subject. if you are interested just search my answers and you can read what i have thought about this subject. my opinion is well known.

i hope you get the constructive feedback you seek.
Nsgarch wrote.....

"However I have several (Redbook) HDCDs and XRCDs whose sonics equal my best LPs.

So anyone who has really great gear of both kinds really should try some of the XRCD releases -- especially the orchestral ones made from the old RCA and Colombia mastertapes which you can (if, like me, you have them) compare with their original LP counterparts. I think you'd be very surprised at how much great sound never made it onto the original vinyl ;--)"

gosh. there are times i wish i had not vowed to abstain from posting on digital verses vinyl threads.....like right NOW!!!
Cdwallace; i mostly agree with Nsgarch.

it is a mistake to confuse preferring vinyl to being anti-digital. digital does not need to be better than vinyl. there is not a market justification for the musical performance of digital to equal or exceed the musical performance of vinyl. digital simply needs to be 'good enough'. when the market is there for better digital then it will happen (in other words; the record companies want to re-issue everything again and the technology has matured to make the delivery method cost effective......in digital it's all about the $$$'s).

why would one like/love both vinyl and digital? it comes down to the music (remember that?)......and also about one's listening environment. if you want to be able to access all the music that you want you need to be multiple format. there is lots of music on either format that is not on both. plus; it's fun to compare.....at least for me. also; there are times when i am not in the mood for the additional focus and hassel of vinyl or i need to multi-task (easier with digital). on vinyl many times the music totally 'demands' my concentration and devotion.

i have personally made a commitment to having the best possible vinyl (Rockport Sirius III) and the best possible digital (EMM Labs Signature) so i have a bit of experience comnparing SOTA for both. i also have 6000 Lps, 3000 cds and 700 sacds. i love them all.

even though i clearly prefer vinyl (it's not really even close) i totally enjoy digital.

i made an exception to my 'no posting on vinyl verses digital thread' vow to answer your thoughtful question as your question is neutral.

and BTW Ngsarch; i don't think Vinyl is done getting better.....although they are closer to their optimal point than digital (hopefully digital will improve anyway).
Cdwallace; i will respond to your points;

you write;"I agree completely. However, I must point out that personal preference for vinyl (subjective) should not be passed as knowledge of the topic at hand, is digital actually better than analog. To appropriately answer this question, I would assume it would require knowledge of both pro's and con's of both analog and digital (non-subjective). Again like I said before, everyone has and is entitled to thier own personal preference. But how can one provide an unbiased answer unless preference is removed and factual pro's and con's are processed (facts). Intepretation of the result is then left to the question poser (subjective)."

to me the 'better' or 'best' are improper to use toward art.....'prefer', 'more satisfying', 'more life-like to my ears', 'more involving'......would all be ways i would describe how i view vinyl in relation to digital. i could care less about any subjective reasons. music is art. i eat organic fruit and vegtables because they taste much better. my wife tells me they are better for me for some objective reasons. i don't care about that.

the reasons i had sworn off getting involved in this subject again is that the whole need to find objective justifications why i like something gets in the way of the enjoyment and confuses what is important. why simply does not matter....TO ME.

i say....JUST LISTEN.

you wrote; "Would this constitute suffient explaination of why CD sales alone almost unreachably exceed vinyl sales, when factoring sales of CD's and vinyl outside of the perameters of "high end" or audiophile reproductions?"

digital is a market driven product...and every new digital advance is market driven. the obvious ease of production and use of digital media and the economic force it causes are responsible for who buys what. performance audio issues drive vinyl.....and the maket for performance 2-channel audio is small (but feisty).

you wrote;"This speaks volumes to me, care to be a little more specific, based on your experiences?"

the whole culture of vinyl (buying, the 'art' aspect of album covers', cleaning, diferent pressings, tt set-up, taking the vinyl out of the sleeve, putting it on the tt, cueing the arm, dropping the needle, un-muting the preamp, then waiting for the music)....is all like foreplay. there is a small element of that with digital but it is truely different. anticipation is part of it. then the much more involving musical experience; which many times is soooo immersive as to 'demand' attention'. the relaexed nature of vinyl causes your body to be at ease. it is difficult to not pay attention. my body knows when i have listened to vinyl. it is physical. one of life's true pleasures.

OTOH digital gets a much lower portion of my attention; i need to concentrate to be immersed into digital and the level of calmness and serenity is greatly reduced. it is there....digital is not to be dismissed...but it is limited sensually.

with vinyl you are concentrating on the event.....digital is a little more about the sound.

you wrote; "Much appreciated but still subjective to some degree. Being experienced in both areas, can you help me understand how you came to this mindset, based on factual information and results?"

if i were making an objective checklist of what the best vinyl does better than the best digital (and now we can use the word 'better').....

--much more bandwidth...lots more information....dramatically so.

--much more dynamic.....particularly micro-dynamic.

--much lower noise floor. there are many Lps where you can easily hear music that digital only vaguely hints at. noise on digital....musical content on vinyl.

--continuous. no gaps.

i realize that my above interpretations of my perceptions fly in the face of some widely accepted opinions on digital. on previous threads regarding this subject i have attempted to discuss these issues. at a certain point i decided that it was not productive to do so....and i simply did not make the points again. i could care less what some measurements say. anyone that has heard the comparison in my room would easily ageee with my points.

it is clear to anyone that listens...at the SOTA.