2. analog
  3. 1325242780

Pros and Cons of "Staying with" Analog and Vinyl

After having various turntables over the last 40 years, I am seriously considering getting out of analog. The "vinylists" argue that analog playback sounds more natural, musical, and provides more of an emotional response. I have experienced this feeling several times while listening to my modest vinyl collection, and tend to agree....until I begin hearing pops, clicks, surface noise. I keep my vinyl generally clean and protected

However, after listening to the 40th anniversay edition of Jethro Tull's "Aqualung" I am more convinced that analog is just not worth the time, money and, maintenance. The dynamics on new Aqualung are superb and there seems to be much more detail to what I remember of the Mobile Fidelity remastered recording

I have a modest analog set-up Rega P3-24 with their upgraded PS and the Dynavector 10X5 MC. I was on the verge of upgrading to the new Rega RP-6 which includes a newly design PS, and a choice of color plinths. Even with a generous trade-in value offered by the dealer, I would still be putting in about $1300 + which would get me into the Dynavector DV 20MKII ( above their 10X5.)

I personally don't see the value regardless of the sonic qualitative edge of analog. Maybe, the money could be spent elsewhere or not at all. BTW, I am not getting into computer audio, and am STILL not convinced that a BASIC DAC will bring me closer to analog sound quality. Members have recommended Peachtree's DACIT, and even the supposedly new and improved Musical Fidelity V-DAC II. I have a Rega Apollo player. A great sounding player, but it has its flaws.

Therefore, I would like to hear the pros and cons of staying with analog....or just dumping it. Thanks
sunnyjim

Showing 2 responses by mlsstl

mlsstl
1,450 posts
 
Viridian wrote: "There are tons of performances that have only been issued on LP and never remastered on any other format..."

There is another option. Over the past 10 years I've converted about 2,000 LP and open reel tapes to digital format. I now have my entire collection on a music server and, other than a few items with sentimental value, got rid of the LPs.

I resigned from the "audiophile" club long ago. Digital has its own issues, but I find it amusing when the vinyl advocates blithely overlook the inherent clicks, pops, surface noise, off-center holes, inner groove distortion and other flaws while proclaiming the format inherently superior.

My take? I have wonderful recordings on LP and lousy ones. Same thing is true of digital. Many of the complaints about modern recordings have zero to do with format. Rather, the problems are based in the fads and fashions currently in vogue in the recording industry.

I've got a couple of 2nd generation open reels made from master tapes back in the early 1970s. When I record them to digital, they sound just like the tapes! The digital process does nothing to change it. The same thing happens when I digitize my LPs - unprocessed, they sound just like the original LP.

I know the golden eared types can spend endless hours worried about minutia, but as respects impact on sound quality, I find the original choices made by artists, recording engineers and producers multiple orders of magnitude larger than the storage format decision.
mlsstl
1,450 posts
 
Dougdeacon wrote: "Why describe what you hear and prefer in emotionally neutral terms while describing what others hear and prefer as "minutia" [sic] of concern only to "golden eared types"? You made many valid points, only to undermine them with a descent into argumentum ad hominem. I see no reason to disrespect anyone else's hearing, musical tastes or sonic priorities."

I always find it interesting that some people can come into a conversation after-the-fact and take personal offense at things written before they began participation in the thread.

And then you lecture on the need to remain "emotionally neutral". Around here? Are you serious? You've got a very selectively applied definition of "argumentum ad hominem"!

I've been in this hobby a very long time and the phrase "golden ear" has been around as long as I remember to describe those hobbyists who focus on the subtle aspects of playback. I've never thought of it as a pejorative term, and apparently neither did The Absolute Sound consider it such when they started their "Golden Ear Awards" for new equipment or the speaker company that used the phrase to name their company!

I realize that my approach to music listening probably puts me in the minority around these parts, but that's fine. It's a big world and there is plenty of room for everyone. There is absolutely no reason to take umbrage over a commonly used phrase that wasn't even pointed in your general direction much less at you.
More to discover