Assuming there is a difference in the nature of analog sound compared to digital sound (as I do,) there are different ways of listening to each. To me, analog is more textured and real sounding, (some, or many may not agree) but does that mean it’s not possible to enjoy digital sound? On the contrary, I must adapt a different way of listening that doesn’t actively compare the two. If one keeps the analog ideal always in mind, it makes it difficult to appreciate digital music. Therefore I have to block that ideal from my mind and listen to digital on its own terms. It must generate its own reality. Only then, can I sit back and enjoy.
You get a pretty accurate picture of one’s priorities in analog vs digital once you’ve read their posts. Of course, there are few exceptions but mostly come here for tooting their biases on vinyl superiority over digital 😊
Yep, as mentioned previously, optimizing streaming solution is complex undertaking.
Analog vs. digital superiority arguments are perhaps the worst for conflating subjective with the objective. The chances any particular audiophile has an objectively equal analog and digital setup is very unlikely. And then we have the seemingly inherent biases of many.
The only authoritative comment I can make is digital still in relative infancy. Innovations in digital will likely far outstrip analog.
"You feel alert, unlike with [the anesthetic] pentothal, which left patients feeling really worn out and hungover," Dombrowski says. "But while propofol induces sleep, it's not a clean, clear sleep."
'K...*mmmm* What do you Rx for someone you Really Don't Like?!
..no, I don't want to know...
@barts , agreed. Most have gone through variations to adapt to the changes in the tech over time in their systems. I've no doubt that with the increases in digital process speed a digital file can 'approximate' an analog source to a degree that few will regard... Noticing that tubes are showing up in a remarkable amount of offerings; easier to entice the 'nuevo audiofry'...and, perhaps, some old ones as well... ;)
*L* Pick your response: Analog, Digital, and Hybrid.....So '20's *L*
Analog is technically inferior to digital, but is often recorded with better dynamic range due to the modern loudness wars of digital. I sold all my analog, but when I listen to my friend's, I have to change my listening to ignore the snap, crackle, pop and hiss.
People don't want to hear this, but good digital takes an entirely different skill set. Not unlike analog, you cannot just spend your way to good sound. There are things you need to understand to do it well, but the logic is different from analog, and may even seem counter-intuitive to an analog lover.
I suspect that many people that post the superiority of analog, really have not been able to set up a digital system that is "analogous to analog" if you get my meaning.
I'm not saying digital is superior either. It's certainly more convenient. Both are good. I get outstanding sound from various digital gear.
I think it was John Atkinson who had a master tape (analog) transferred to a digital master, and also mastered onto a vinyl record! In his comparison of the three he said, the master tape and the digital copy sounded exactly the same, while the record made his knees go weak! I think many equate records with analog (which it is), but records add a special something as though the music is recreated a second time at the stylus tip with an intimacy, an “engagement “ with the original musical event that digital subjectivity is lacking!
A few years ago, I spent 3 days in rapt attention listening to a mid 6 figure computer sourced (using Master Class soft wear) helping with a room at THE Show in Las Vegas (Daniel Hertz). It was about the most amazing SQ I have ever experienced. However, it was an intellectual not a visceral one. With my analog system, I “get weak in the knees”. Listening to vinyl grabs my emotions and puts me into a meditative space. Sure, great digital can be a great experience. But I take analog every time.
Sounds to me that you have to work awful hard to get digital to sound more analog, when all you have to do is throw on a record...
right -- like good analog isn’t a lot work to get right and keep right ... 🙄
like anything, something unfamiliar takes time to understand and master... for those willing to do so...(instead of just spewing negativity on forums, which is sooo easy...)
ask someone younger what it takes to get a new analog front end spec’d and dialed into a good system ... now, that can be truly daunting for the uninitiated...
Like I said before, analog people like listening to distortion and noise. What is it that drives this phantasy. Does it make you more of a man to own a turntable? I have to own a turntable because I have been collecting records since 1958. That is all we had unless you could afford a reel to reel. My dad had an Ampex. Boy did that sound great, tape hiss and all. If I can get a properly mastered 24/96 or 192 file I prefer it to analog. It is magic how the music erupts from a noiseless totally black background. You can NEVER get that out of a turntable I don't care how much you spend. If you think vinyl can beat that my guess would be your system needs work and not just the digital stuff, your speakers and amp. They are not telling you the reality of the situation. Again, I do have records that sound better than the digital counterparts I have heard. This is entirely a mastering issue. I agree, the loudness wars suck, many digital recordings could be done a lot better from the perspective of an audiophile. But, to discount digital entirely is to shoot yourself in the foot which you are entitled to do.
@bigkidz gave one of the biggest factors. modest investment of both analog and digital and digital will most likely win. This was explained in a nice podcast via TMR Audio a couple months ago.
It is like everything in our world in that there are many factors and won't ever be black and white. I have more invested in analog vs digital and still find on newly released music that they are very close while the LP will still have a bit warmer mids and less harsh, but very close.
On older releases from the 70s-90s the LP usually wins without much competition.
It has been a bit of a psychological struggle for me where I was resistant to liking digital. I have invested so much in vinyl and it takes so much more effort that it didn't seem right to accept digital. Once I got over that nonsense I love it! It allows me to listen to music sooner and decide where I may want to invest in more vinyl. It also is much better when cooking or when I have friends over as I always feel weird interrupting someone every 15min....excuse me, gotta go flip the record. LOL
@dhite but once you get a reference level phono stage - and only then digital cannot compete. Very few people I know own a reference level phono stage. We just upgraded a Manley Steelhead and stock for $9K not close - once we upgraded (24 newer parts installed) then it was better. But that is still not reference level compared to the phono stage we build.
I do understand your struggle though. I went through that many years ago before we began t build our own components.
"It has been a bit of a psychological struggle for me where I was resistant to liking digital. I have invested so much in vinyl and it takes so much more effort that it didn't seem right to accept digital"
"It has been a bit of a psychological struggle for me where I was resistant to liking digital. I have invested so much in vinyl and it takes so much more effort that it didn’t seem right to accept digital"
Appreciate your honesty.
i think this explains most of the negativity re digital from the ’old timers’ tethered to their analog rigs
two things can both be very good, and fully worthy of enjoyment...
Stop over thinking and enjoy the music. I will take me so music from any source I can. Yes some sound way better but I don’t always have the time and access to my listening room.
There’s a similar thread over at Music and I contributed a note on this theme. A major reason that some digital listening disappoints those familiar with analog is the very poor analog section even in some of the most expensive DACs. They often compare VERY unfavorably with the "analog section" of a phono pre, which is to say, the phono pre itself. But they are there to do a very similar job.
A DAC may have a sophisticated digital section providing apparent transparency, low noise, space and dynamics to a bunch of instruments that may seem themselves to sound like cardboard cut-outs to the analog aficionado. And some listeners think these DACs are great--especially after good reviews emphasizing those digital attributes. Without providing as much in effort to the analog section though, the DAC will miss the harmonic richness and depth of sound we usually attribute to good analog.
From the point of the DAC maker, most of his potential customers may never have heard a musical instrument except through a loudspeaker. So some multi-kilobuck DACs use chip op amps costing a buck or two at the center of their analog section. Not to mention cheap switching PSs. Color me cynical.
Simply replacing chip op amps in DACs of all sorts with good discrete analog sections has become a hobby to some and a profession for others. Think of what is done modifying Oppos for ex., analog section and PS.
So, if you’re an analog person, as I am, don’t tell me of your disappointment with your expensive DAC. Look inside first. Then we can talk.
And by the way, while amp and preamp manufacturers are pleased to tell you what’s inside their cases, DAC makers often are not. Rather, they sometimes try hard to hide what’s inside. As do many of the reviewers.
Having hunkered down in the corners of Audiogon for I dunno a few years, I’ll say this.
The analog v digital thing had become a matter of faith. People are set in their ways/beliefs/ideologies/dogmas and while some are very erudite about their positions, at best it’s still like watching William F Buckley debate Alexander Cockburn: both are well versed, both are articulate, and though both can agree that they are wrestling with the same set of facts, there’s a 15% chance that they will ever agree on anything.
“Debates” that imho will never reach closure are over - digital v analog - $2 billion cable v lamp wire - the quality or lack thereof of Bob Dylan’s singing - expensive v cheapskate - solid state v tube By no means a comprehensive list. I opt for the latter in the above binary options.
Life is short. Imho people should just be happy with the particular paths that they have chosen in an attempt to reach their particular nirvana, enjoy the journey, sit back and enjoy the damn music.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
