Madman! Digital vs Vinyl

My Mad Man is a Universal Music SACD with DSD CD layer that is mostly listenable through my Audiolab CDT 6000 and Audio Alchemy DDP + PS 5 power supply

Why not choose one format, play Elton John and simply enjoy the music? 

My speakers are very revealing GR-Research NX-Oticas with sub.  TT is Well Tempered Reference with rebuilt Lyra Clavis.  Schiit Freya pre with monoblock Aegirs. Currently building an Elekit TU-9600S 300B tube amp. Gryphon silver cables.  Transparent phono cables from TT to phonostage.

Phono's I'm considering, Herron if I could find one, PS Audio Stellar phono or Bob's devices SUT plus Sunvalley phono.

Interesting challenge- I’ll give it a shot, however, I’ve always found Madman to be a horribly recorded album. Very dark, almost veiled. 

whether it’s worth investing in a really good phono preamp or not.

It would of very helpful if you let us know what components you have and which preamps your interested in. A budget would would also be very helpful. Then we can give you better advice specific to your audio chain beyond the general.

Also there are good to bad recordings on both vinyl and digital along with different audio chains, no way to start in the ideal equal.

The general consensus is that  vinyl sounds better than digital, so it isn’t just Fremer. Digital takes samples of an analog signal which when translated back to analog is not better than the original signal. You sometimes hear of DACs touted as sounding like analog, never the other way. As always, it depends on the quality of the audio components and their synergy in the audio chain. Like Fremer and many others, I have both analog and digital audio chains.

Digital is pure convenience. Vinyl is pure bliss. 

I’ve concluded this.  It all depends on how the source was recorded and you need to spend a lot more on your vinyl rig to exceed digital results.  That said I prefer well recorded vinyl!  My vinyl rig is VPI HW-40, Pass x-27, Van Dre Hul Stradivarius.  Digital is Denafrips Terminator Plus w/ Gaia.

I have some really great sounding vinyl of Bill Evans, albeit not the original LPs...likely remastered and I do prefer the vinyl over the CDs I have of the same stuff.

I find it's highly dependent on the source.  Some streams I listen to have virtually no dynamic range.  They're mastered to be loud, not to sound good.  Others can be stunning.

Same with vinyl, everything depends on the pressing, and dead wax info isn't always the complete answer either.  I have a few same matrix pressings that sound a bit different too.

For as many cd’s or streamed content you show me, I can show you just as many vinyl Lp’s that will sound better. It is in the pressing. Some sound like utter garbage, others will make your head spin played on a good set up. I have yet to hear any digital content that possesses that "tubey magic" that some, not all, Lp’s have.

OP: “Given that the age of the vinyl stamper impacts the SQ of a given copy of an LP significantly, wouldn’t it be true that if you stick with a single digital source, e.g., Qobuz…. ”

That is just one variable. Old albums can be remastered a number of times, or not mastered but produced from a secondary transfer as master. It is extremely complicated as to what you get.

On the other hand, in general if you double the cost of your system all the recording sound MUCH better making typical recording variance less important. So, it is a matter of proportional differences.

Also, when your only source of music had to be purchased… at a high cost per unit (I remember only being able to purchase one album every few months, or none) you tend to be really careful what you buy. Also, exposure only came from radio and friends. This tends to force drilling to find the very best music and recording and listen to it over and over. But in the digital world, you can sample tons of stuff… and follow interests. Don’t like the album you found, for whatever reason… move on.

Also, the catalogues are only going to get more robust. I am sure different mastering are in the future of streaming and more and more obscure stuff. So, to me, this still points to digital as the future. Although I have enjoyed the hundreds of spectacular vinyl recodings I have, some original and many audiophile.

I appreciate everyone’s thoughts on this.  This leads to a related question.  Given that the age of the vinyl stamper impacts the SQ of a given copy of an LP significantly, wouldn’t it be true that if you stick with a single digital source, e.g., Qobuz through Roon, you’ll on average get better SQ than the LP copies you happen to have in your collection?

@2dougthebiker - to answer your question, with €7k invested in your analogue front end, it is definitely worth investing in a quality phono stage - pricewise/quality, up to something like the Parasound JC3+, I would say.

But will €10k of analogue gear trounce €10k of digital playback -  no.

As regards comparisons of specific recording on vinyl and digital, there are massive variations at both ends.  A friend of mine used to blind tests using me a the subject with him playing various copies of LPs from different mastering houses and pressing plants, and sometimes albums from the same pressing plants where the variable was the age of the stamper. There were significant differences in sound quality. Then throw in the differences in mastering /  A to D transfers of digital files for CD and streaming and the number of possible permutations are enormous.

However, I will try your comparison as soon as I get my digital streamer back up and running. It's down while I install a hardwired connection to it.

@ghdprentice - it’s a question of availability. Black Ice on ECM (Wolfert Brederode) is only available on redbook CD, no vinyl, though I rely on vinyl for a lot of obscure records that were never reissued legitimately, let alone on digital formats. Thus, I do digital of necessity, though if someone were starting out today, I would not recommend vinyl unless they have deep pockets; not just to get what the format is truly capable of, but the cost of some of these records is absolutely prohibitive.

To me, the key is whatever gives you more access to high quality music. The compositions, performances and recordings themselves can be scrutinized on each level. But the listener may choose "blow me away" as a show piece rather than something more off the beaten path. It’s a pretty personal choice. Not everything is digitized, let alone at high quality. Ironically, the best performance of The Cream remains a "bootleg."

I listen to obscure jazz that is borderline cacophony and for the most part obscure. That stuff can be found sometimes on digital (in CD, not necessarily on streaming facilities) but it is largely needle drops (some of the early CD reissues were pulled from tape; as to streaming I have no idea- my experience, limited to Qobuz, was that it was shallow in catalog depth). The original discs, made during the ’70s, are not the best representation of the vinyl art, but they actually sound good if you get a clean copy, though this stuff has gotten tres cher in the last couple years.

Vinyl had better centre voicing and wider separation of interments.

Digital stream was bolder, better clarity yet a little flatter.

Main

Parasound New classic pre + Parasound Zone Master 2350 (600 watt class D)

PSB Image 2B (upgrades tweeters) and /or Polk Audio LSi15 + Velodyne sub 

Digital

Audio Lab 6000N,  All audioquest cables, Tidal stream

Vinyl

Sony PS-X50, Rega Ania MC LO, iFi phono2

(and my preference is.......           )

OP:   ”I ask because I‘ve got a $5k TT with a $2k cartridge on it and am trying to figure out whether it’s worth investing in a really good phono preamp or not.”

This is a really important question to ask, particularly at this time. Digital is finally making strides to make parity with digital. The cost of acquiring disks, even if used is significant… while streaming is much lower ongoing cost with the benefit of a nearly infinite library. If you are future oriented, I think the answer is simple and clear… digital.
 

I have 2,000 pristine, many audiophile vinyl discs… and have experienced analog… well since born nearly 70 years ago. So I maintain and enjoy my analog end, but only 5% of the time or so since I have an equivalent digital end. If I was younger, no question I would put all my money into digital to get the best I could afford. It is now the future (as opposed to the CD promise 35 odd years ago). Splitting your money with two approaches is not going to be as effective as one.

If you prefer what analogue does, then it definitely is worth it.

I ask because I‘ve got a $5k TT with a $2k cartridge on it and am trying to figure out whether it’s worth investing in a really good phono preamp or not.

Based on responses so far, I’m thinking maybe not.

Digital has strengths - are they important to you?

Analogue has strengths - are they important to you?

There is no 'best' - but there sure is 'different'.

If an LP plays in the forest and there's no one there to hear it, does it still sound better than a CD?  Why do people continue to do these silly comparisons?  🤣

I have 4 or 5 non-US pressings of Tumbleweed that are early, including a couple UK DJMs and some other early ex-US DJM pressings. The earliest UK pressing I have here actually has less pronounced bass than some of the others. (Sorry don't have the matrices to hand). I do have an SACD of it too, which sounds fine for what it is, but I'm far more advanced on vinyl playback than I am on digital. I had Qobuz for a little while but found that it didn't have what I was chasing-- stuff that is unobtaninum on vinyl, hard to find, private or small label. It did sound pretty good for what it was, though. (Don't remember if I tried Tumbleweed via Qobuz when I was using it). 

I think a lot depends on system. 

I sold my $15k tt setup a few years ago and every vinyl album I had. I also did numerous comparisons between vinyl and hi res digital (dsd, MQA, 24/192), and digital won. 

Two totally different versions, Madman on the Tumbleweed deluxe has Mick Ronson on guitar and is a great version.

I have the monaural Brandenburg Concertos three-disc set performed by Felix Prohaska and the Vienna State Orchestra. I play it on a midfi setup with a stereo AT-VM95ML cartridge. I haven't seen it available on any other medium, so vinyl is best.

My analog rig ( vpi classic 3, zephyr mimc*, ear 834 phono pre) just sounds warmer than my digital setup (chord qutest w, curious usb cable, rega Saturn CD player) They both sound great. 
it’s just a matter of how much time I have to critically listen. Some recording on hi res or master sound almost identical to vinyl. Roxy music/Avalon, is very close. 
All the police albums sound better on vinyl. U2 sounds fantastic as well on vinyl. 
Just  depends on the recording. 

USA pressings of early EJ records was terrible. I received a copy of don't shoot me that's unlistenable. I shouldn't be venting on the digital topics. ....and away we go!

Why is madman on tumbleweed?

The Madman included on Qobuz Tumbleweed Connection Deluxe Edition is a totally different performance and much better engineered recording than the one on the Madman Across the Water album on Qubuz.

If you’ve never listened to it, you’re in for a treat

Damn...Tumbleweed brings back memories. I love my father's gun outro. 

Sounded like fun. I don’t have the Delux version. But I do have an audiophile 180gram pressing of Madman across the water manufactured by DCC. I have a great analog and digital ends… see my user ID.

It is easy for me to synch them and volume equalizes them and switch back and forth. They sound the same to me. I kept thinking I was listening to one and realizing it is the other.

I have:

Linn LP12, Koetsu Rosewood Signature cartridge and a Audio Research Reference 3 phonostage

Digital is a Aurender W20SE streamer, an Audio Research CD9SE DAC / player.

I don’t think there is a large population that have equally costly rigs that sound the same. Right mine my digital rig is about $5K more expensive than my analog.. ~ $42K for digital and ~ $37K for analog. I will be receiving $5K of analog upgrades soon… bringing them to equality. I don’t think it is going to be earth shattering improvement, they are both very good reproductions of the material they are fed.

One could argue that my analog / digital ends are the same by subtracting $5K for the transport in my DAC. On the other hand using the $22K Berkeley Reference DAC the results were the same. Choosing components can easily mitigate small differences in the cost equation.

I am a member of a forum that has lots of folks with $100K and much higher analog and digital ends. I think the consensus is that analog has about a 10% advantage in well chosen high end systems… all the way up… we are talking million dollar systems.

This advantage is small in comparison to what it used to be. So, depending how good you are at putting together systems you could easy consider it equal.

This advantage will not last for long. Qobuz offers lots of high Rez recordings, over time most will be. Aurender offer streamers capable of similar performance at the level of the turn table I have. Then you need a Phonostage for analog and DAC for digital.

Michael Fremer is always insisting vinyl is better, but he’s got $50k rigs with $25k+ phono preamps.  Especially with lacquers.

But I’m wondering whether there’s a large population of commonly available vinyls that have superior SQ when compared with equal $ digital setups.

Michael Fremer is always insisting vinyl is better, but he’s got $50k rigs with $25k+ phono preamps.  Especially with lacquers.

But I’m wondering whether there’s a large population of commonly available vinyls that have superior SQ when compared with equal $ digital setups.

@big_greg hyperbole, dock my account one LP kind sir…. bring that thing over, !,,,,,

@o_holter I have a decent TT ( Brinkmann Bardo / Triplaner / Lyra Delos vs. NAIM Unitiserve w Pardo Linear PSU and Aesthetix Pandora Signature DAC vs. Revox 15 ips half track B77 mk 3 w custom tube electronics, at that level….differences while very apparent are not a slam dunk in favor of any format. They each have virtues and weaknesses…..

obviously keeping investment and sonic returns balanced across the three formats is challenging…. and fun

In these format wars, i look for insights…. 

w respect.

Jim

The NT-505 is no Pinto, but yes, a good analog setup will show it up. 

Tomic601 - so they say. But is it really such a big improvement in digital sound, from "good mid level", to "top level"? I don't have much experience. But from what I've heard, it still sounds digital to me....

Lyra Atlas ? Formula 1 vs a Pinto…..

Enjoy the music

I do this once a year - testing the state of digital streaming, vs vinyl. In my system, vinyl still rules. I compare a high end analog chain to a mid-end digital chain. So of course, analog wins. Even so, I note that the gap is getting smaller. I compare the Lyra Atlas cart, to the Teac NT-505 dac/streamer.

I have the original Tumbleweed connection LP, and can tell you that it sounds great, better than digital, in my system. However it does not include Madman across the water (and I dont have that LP). What I can say is, some Tumbleweed connection songs, like Love song, sound absolutely fabulous on my vinyl rig. Also quite good from Qobuz streaming (AKM dac - better sound than I had before). I greatly enjoy the LP originals of Tumbleweed, and Goodbye Yellow Brick Road. These transport me into the time and the spirit of the artist, much more than any digital version - so far.

I have been carrying out CD vs Vinyl on different TT > Tonearm > Cartridge combinations over the past few years.

In the same way a TT > Tonearm > Cartridge can sound very different to each other, adding the CD replay into the equation can also show a different emphasis on a recording.

I have also got a Pre Amp with Two Inputs only for this experience and can set up the CDP to almost share the same replay as the LP.

Swapping Sources is just a one click operation, and I have Albums that are almost parity for the Volume setting and Albums that can require a few clicks on the Volume to achieve a close volume match.  

I have not got too lost in which is the best, as either has areas within a recording that can be an attractor in comparison to the other.

I have come to a stage where I ask which Source is the most desirable to be lived with if the replay is left to run on from one Source.

With this method, the extended listening is usually settled into within a Track, and the other Source can be left without need to be reintroduced.

This experience stands for both Vinyl and CD, neither has a place of superiority when the SQ is assessed for the attraction it produce during a presentation. 

Fuzztone is correct. Bill Evans’ Complete Village Vanguard Recordings 1961 sounds better on CD than vinyl, so does Duke Jordan’s JORDU. It would be incorrect to conclude based on this small sample size that CD sounds better than vinyl. It just is not scientific. Sorry to bust your bubbles but there is no “result “. The experiment needs more data to be conclusive. Nice try though. 
N.B. Again I am talking about specific CD recordings of these two albums. 

Every LP sounds different.

There:s that.

One of my favorite albums on CD begged me to buy it on LP.  

It Iicked eggs.  

Means nothing.