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.
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.
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.
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.
"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...
"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"
@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.
@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
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.
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...
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.
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!
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.
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.
"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*
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 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 😊
@jjss49 ... digital cable matching to your components so important. If folks haven't cable rolled extensively in their system maybe not even exorbitant priced analogue. Just my 2 cents... I've heard some pretty crappy expensive analogue systems. @ latik ... drop $100K or more on analogue and plug and play a Node and say my analogue is so much better. LOL... what did they really expect or were they just trying to impress themselves?
I'm forever amused by those who spend a couple hundred bucks on a streamer and then run it through a dozen year old processor and post their $80,000 (or way more) analogue setup is way superior to it.
Digital runs from the wall out.... plug, AC lines and conditioning, streamer, processor and then on to the rest of the system. Treat and tweak digital the same way you did your analogue system including running the streamer on a good router and good Ethernet cables, be sure your streamer to DAC is on the best sounding cable for that link, and DAC to preamp, and so forth. Do the work and you will get the sound.
Ha- I’m barely surviving building my analog+digital chains. Adding R2R plus tape media would not pass WAF and my bank account. Survival trumps audio bliss.
Digital is more picky on quality of speaker and amplifier but when your system is setup up correctly with the necessary components and speakers both are magic and you just pick the best recordings on either format and enjoy.
glad both camps of creators seek to best the other…..some of us continue to invest in digital, the LP and high speed tape and enjoy the music, very rarely available….wait for it……on all three formats….
but does that mean it’s not possible to enjoy digital sound?
This is your personal subjective opinion not supported by the robust sales of digital gear, media, and streaming. If you’re asking can one enjoy their digital audio as much as analog is also highly subjective AND it depends on the quality of your audio chain.
Although the audio quality of digital components are growing rapidly, the sound approaches analog at significantly higher price points such as MSB, dCS, Soulution, Lampi, etc. The cheapest “analog sounding” DACs I’ve found is the $10K Mojo Mystique or the $15k APL Hi-FI DSD-SR mk2 (this DAC was designed to sound analog).
Maybe you’ll enjoy a tube DAC, like the $3k PrimaLuna EVO 100 Tube DAC, better than your current component.
Interesting discussion. I do agree that on my system, the analog side is more convincing to me. Through the years, when one side, analog or digital, got too far ahead of the other side, I poured time and money into equaling things out. I’m at a point now where I really do enjoy both, and if truth be told, (for whatever reasons) I listen more to digital than analog. And I do have a sense of reality therein. BUT. when I play a record, even though the digital seemed convincing, I hear more texture and space. And, I just have to convince myself when streaming or playing a disc that it’s just as real, even though the sonic signatures are different. Where we disagree, is on the reason for this. After many, many years listening and experimenting, I think the sonic nature is inherent in the media. You are convinced the difference ls due to the quality of the equipment used in each. Maybe we’re both right!
Can I enjoy recorded music AS recorded music? Can I enjoy "Hamlet" the movie knowing it’s not the live stage performance? I think most of us here can. Some may like the analog experience more and some may like the digital experience more. That may very well depend upon their analog budget vs. their digital budget and their acumen at selecting components. I think we are now past the time when it can be said one is inherently superior to the other. In my case, I have the luck of two fine front ends (by my standards) and am enjoying them equally--though it’s hard to deny the convenience of digital--especially if relaxation is an issue. Read on.
But you have raised the stakes to a new level. I call it "the WILLFUL suspension of dis-belief" for if a person has his wits about him he will not be fooled into believing he is hearing a live concert. One has to try, Sometimes being totally relaxed (and I’m not going to divulge how I may attain that state) I can try to believe I am there, and succeed. It may be easier with a simple recording, a solo instrument perhaps. The first note* of the Chopin first Ballad played by Moravec comes to mind. But I have done it to the Mahler 3 too.
So what I hear you saying is that on your system you find it easier to push yourself into this willful state listening to your analog side, than from your digital side. Am I getting close?
*To me it always sounds like that piano is in my room, and it’s 16/44..
"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."
This thread makes me grateful that I don't have this problem!
I thought someone would question me on how one listens differently. (I’m surprised no one has brought this up til now.) And your point about the in-person experience vs. the recorded experience is also pertinent. I do believe one has to listen differently to recorded music, to “suspend disbelief” in order enjoy recordings, which seldom if ever match the real thing. Same with digital vs. analog. I think digital is less “real” than analog. You may disagree.
"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."
It's hard to make out your premise and your argument. How about this: If one keeps the in-person musical experience ideal in mind, it makes it difficult to appreciate recorded music. This would seem even more difficult but we are all here because we do appreciate recorded music. And IMO it's not difficult at all!
"I just want to point out that you may have to listen a little differently to each in order to enjoy both"
Actually, how does one listen differently? Can't figure that out. As for me, I just sit down and . . . listen.
I find it so interesting that many people prefer listening to distortion. The vast majority of recordings done since the mid 80s are digital. If a digital recording sounds different at all when played back through an analog system, that difference is by definition "distortion." In digital form music is just data, binary numbers, distinct values. As long as the data is not corrupted there is no distortion, none all the way to the final DAC and the first analog step. Remember analog cell phones? pretty bad. Now we have digital phones, clear as a bell regardless of how crappy the signal is until you lose it entirely. So, many prefer playing a record made from a digital master to just playing the digital data back through a DAC. Forgetting about background noise and issues generic to vinyl playback but you also add distortion produced by the cartridge and phono stage added to the mix. There is absolutely nothing wrong with good digital playback. It is eons superior to analog playback. It is just that some brains can't get a handle on it. Proof that you hear what you think you will here. Lay instinct. I think it is amazing how good vinyl playback can get. I certainly have records that sound better than their digital counterparts. But, that difference is a mastering issue and not the fault of digital playback. The best playback I have ever heard was from high resolution copies of digitally recorded music.
My DAC is the Audio Research CD9se. Which by the way I compared in my system with a Berkeley Alpha 3 which is considerably more expensive than the ARC. I found really minuscule differences between the two with my tastes favoring the ARC.
My post inevitably engenders the debate on the relative merits of digital vs. analog. That was not essentially my main focus, though. I really enjoy good sounding digital recordings. My point is not that one mutually excludes the other. They can both peacefully coexist. I just want to point out that you may have to listen a little differently to each in order to enjoy both. I do believe there is a difference in texture between the two formats. As I stated, some or many may disagree.
"
So what can’t people just like what they like." +1 @earlflynn
At the moment my front end is all digital. Some days I get the itch to jump into the deep end of the pool and add an analog front end as well.
Then my synaptic activity calms down (propofol anyone?). And I simply relax and listen to some of my favorite music. The original cast West Side Story is a good one.
You see its simple for me...I just wanna listen to the MUSIC, not the equipment. I'm quite sure many of us have gone through many iterations of systems that either please or get changed once again. I'm at a good place. In recognition of that I don't want to muck it up by adding what would essentially be an additional "system". Creates competition in my tiny little OCD brain.
I still listen mostly to vinyl, but as my system has progressed, I have come around to somewhat appreciate digital. I do have a few old CDs, and a NAD 5000 cd player that I mostly used for testing vintage equipment. I now have that and a Node 2i in my two channel system.
The vinyl system is still king by a wide margin, but the digital is now listenable, which is great for background music when I don't want to bother swapping records, and checking out new music and stuff that hasn't/wont make it to vinyl. I will probably get an external DAC sometime in the future which will hopefully bring the digital stuff up a few notches. The NAD can be used as a transport, having a coax output.
When I'm feeling lazy I play CD's, as I then have more control with the remote. When I'm serious, I'll clean an album and play that. Both sound excellent on my system. I'll never forget the first time my (then) 20 year old daughter picked up the tonearm and attempted to gently place it on a record. She had a frightened look on her face. It was so precious. Vinyl is an experience!
I enjoy both format digital and analog. I listen to CD, Vinyl and Streaming music.
@p01529 one could say the same about some one buy cheap a cheap ass turntable using and built in phono stage and crappy used vinyl. Cuts both ways really.
I just love it when somebody buys the cheapest digital crap on the market then claims it doesn't sound good. (or when somebody buys cheap stuff and claims it beats $1m systems). Why not get some decent equipment before you actually see what good sound sounds like in either environment, vinyl too. IMO, my 5-digit digital setup sounds better than my 5-digit analog system.
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.
