Pros and Cons of "Staying with" Analog and Vinyl

Just my 02c

When CDs first came out, I really hated them. To my (younger) ears, digital just sounded terribly brash and gave me headaches. I stuck with vinyl.

Forward a few years, and the wave of re-issues prompted me to start buying CDs. I started getting better DACs - anyone remember Theta? and I started to think that digital was the way to go. Less background noise, less fuss, less muss.

I ended up selling my Rega RP2, and build a K&K RAKK DAC using line transformers. It was the best sound I had ever gotten out of my rig. During this time I also upgraded my speakers and electronics.

And then... that same Rega I sold to a friend, came back for a visit. This time it had a better cart and a much better phono stage. My friend and I sat down and started spinning some vinyl. Even that cheap analog setup wiped the floor of my digital rig. The turntable sounded more natural, had a bigger soundstage, and was much more engrossing.

I realized with digital, I was stuck on the 'objective' view of music, analyzing the system more than the music. With records, I was swept up in the performances and art.

Since that experience, I've gone back to vinyl. It's been VPI since then, along with some much better electronics. I don't see myself ever going back to digital, especially with some of the quality original first pressings I own.

I don't know Peter. A few decades ago the whole world shifted to the digital side and from what I've seen it has only made analog reproduction stronger. I don't think a few hundred one way or the other will make any difference.

Besides, if the OP really does enjoy music more with another source isn't the issue already settled for him? I don't have a problem with that, but also don't see the need for yet another d vs a thread. Kind of slow around new year's I guess.

Why not keep both - digital and analog? Having an analog and a digital source can work pretty well together. Like so many others I jumped on the CD-train 25 years ago but kept my records. Over the years I upgraded my system to "lesser and lesser power" - currently using 300B amps and discovered that, even though much more hassle, vinyl simply sounds better. If you have that "fiddle around gene" like I, you might enjoy tweaking your analog source to get to better and better sound quality. That's not so easy with digital. I started to record CDs from my own TT using a high quality pro CD recorder and am amazed how close the sound of these CDs comes to the original vinyl playback. Today I'm enjoying both - vinyl, if I have time and want best performance - and digital, if I'm not listening seriously and are too lazy to deal withy vinyl.

Well, perhaps not if just one individual decides to listen to only one medium, it being something other than vinyl. However, I care if many of us start abandoning vinyl. We have all benefitted from the recent vinyl resurgence of the past few years. That is due in large part because people have not abandoned analog. And many new and even young enthusiasts are joining in the fun. There have been many good reissues released as well as advances in equipment. Surely if more people like Sunnyjim switch to only digital, it will have an impact on analog.

I wasn't going to post in this thread as it's all been said sooo many times before. But, as Tmsorosk said it for me without going into specifics, here ya go:

Sunnyjim , your at the same point I was a few years back. Finding a suitable CD player and DAC was the key, and after much toiling I did find just the right combination, do they sound like analog? of coarse not, but digital has many virtues .
Tmsorosk

I enjoy vinyl so much more than cds (cds are nice for the car but are being replaced by mp3 players which are even better for the car) I buy all new releases on vinyl, seek out re-releases and buy used lps as often as I can. I only buy a cd when the vinyl is not available-for example Lisa Hannigan's new release. Occationally when my wife plays aa cd and Im in the other room, I can instantly tell its a cd not vinyl because the cd is less life like.

I think what Hoopster was hinting at with suspended subchasis turntables(or at least one advantage that I've heard)is that the noise(clicks, pops, etc.)is put into a different plane from the music. So, when you listen to the music, you don't hear the noise.

Mlsstl, I've found vinyl recorded to digital really close to the original vinyl, also. I don't want to make blanket statements on format based on that, though. There is a huge amount of digital out there that does not equal vinyl. By having analogue around, we have something to compare digital to(Just like live.). I believe it helps both formats.

Why would anyone care if Sunnyjim decides to listen to only to one medium? Seriously. Was he really asking or just wanting to start another stick poking episode?

Sunnyjim , your at the same point I was a few years back. Finding a suitable CD player and DAC was the key, and after much toiling I did find just the right combination, do they sound like analog? of coarse not, but digital has many virtues .

As we all know, the key to vinyl is clean, clean, clean. Largely then, with good quality vinyl, the ticks are de minimus. if, non-existent.

A bit of work-but then the sound is much better than digital.

Vinyl noise tends to be music genre-specific and/or equipment-related.

In this regard, recordings of solo performances such as solo piano tend to be problematic, as opposed to boisterous rock / pop recordings, which almost always out-shout noise.

As for the role of equipment, some cartridges and styli emphasize surface noise. Elliptical styli, which are used on the vast majority of modern cartridges, have a small contact area and wear a trough at the contact patch in the groove, and the trough gets worse as a record is played repeatedly. High-tech line-contact styli, on the other hand, are basically shaped like the groove and touch much more of the groove, playing parts of the groove that have never been played before and that have experienced no wear - depending upon the geometry, they can ride over the trough cut in the groove by elliptical styli and make even very used records sound new. Also because of the much greater contact area, line-contacts cause much less wear (the pressure is distributed over a much larger part of the groove wall, greatly decreasing wear). The following link shows a picture of the forerunner to the line contact, a Shibata, compared to an elliptical (scroll down to the black and white photo):

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=9OEDAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA66&dq=phono%20cartridges&pg=PA66#v=onepage&q=phono%20cartridges&f=false

Modern high-end tables tend to have very little rumble and thus minimize noise compared to modest tables or mass-market vintage tables.

Poor cartridge set-up, which is extremely common and the biggest problem with vinyl in my opinion, can greatly increase noise. In fact, it is precisely the line-contacts that are hard to set up, as they can only lay in the groove one way to fit - imagine a big "V" sitting down into a little "v" (it won't "work" unless it sits just right in the vertical and horizontal planes).

As for PCM digital, it's fine for low frequency and midrange signals, as such frequencies oscillate relatively slowly compared to PCM's 41,100 times per second sample rate - taking 41,100 "snapshots" per second of, for example, a signal that cycles up and down only 400 times per second (a 400 Hz. signal) will capture such a signal's path with great accuracy, but a 41,100 per second sample rate is inadequate for high frequency signals oscillating at close to the same speed as a the sampling rate - it fails to capture most of the arc of the signal, which is why a PCM recording of orchestral music, with all of the high frequency overtones coming off the string section, sounds unnatural and fatiguing on a high-resolution system. Imagine a camera with a slow shutter speed trying to photograph a jet aircraft or bullet in flight.

Vinyl noise tends to be separate from the music, while PCM digital's problems are woven into the fabric of the music - it's like somebody pissed in the soup and then osterized it. In any event, a reasonably clean LP of most types of music played on a good quality table and cartridge that have been properly set-up, especially where the cartridge uses a line-contact stylus, will not present noise problems (... but I'm the first to admit that all of those conditions need to be present).

Chayro hits the nail on the head with a very insightful comment. This stuff is about music, in whatever form it takes. In the microscopic world of vinyl playback, everything is important, and nothing is.

There is always noise with music. Digital has its own sonic artifacts that can be as detrimental to the listening experience as tics and pops on an LP. Some hear them, some don't.

I always wonder if, as one of those weirdos who could hear a TV picture tube's high-pitched hum when it was on (back in days when there were picture tubes), a particular sensitivity makes digital more or less noisy for some. Who knows? Interesting question, though.

At any rate, have fun with this hobby, don't worry too much, and keep your toes tapping.

I can only listen to so much "old music" so I have a digital collection.

I can only listen to so much "new music" so I have a vinyl collection.

Both have benefits, both can sound good in their own way, so why not have both?

"As for the pops etc. do you freak out at a concert if someone makes a sound? You do listen to live music don't you? If not, perhaps that is part of the problem.

Do you, or would you freak out if you heard pops from your amp, preamp, speakers or cd player? Or maybe there are good pops and bad pops.

I suspect one's preference may be influenced by the system they have. On a well setup high end system vinyl seems to be quite a bit better to my ears.

Some sort of record cleaning machine should probably be part of the system.

As for the pops etc. do you freak out at a concert if someone makes a sound? You do listen to live music don't you? If not, perhaps that is part of the problem.

The lossless codecs are better but IMO not equal to vinyl even at 96k. I think the latest vinyl is also a cut above the older stuff.

My experience is similar to David12, some of the best classical records I picked up cost me $1 at the record store and they were mint or unplayed. Why not pick them up? Yes, a lot of older classical recordings that were transfered to CD sound harsh but the new releases sound great so I do both analog and digital. Just recently, I compared a few albums I have on SACD and vinyl and in each case, the SACD sounded as good as or just slightly better than the record. So, hi rez digital will be my first preference going forward.

I have met fishermen who only flyfish and tie their own flies.

Anyone spend time out on the water? Would you rather spend an afternoon
on a sailboat or on a motor boat? And if the answer is a sailboat, the
question becomes wood or plastic?

I am happy with both mediums.I have vinyl days and digital days listening.I recently got a mint original Zodiac Cosmic sounds Lp which is not out on CD,one reason I will never part with my TT.I am also not happy with 40-50 year old digital releases compared to my vinyl original first presses or promo's for the most part.I will keep both.I also find better extended high end and bass with a good piece of vinyl.

The most important thing you said was the YOU do not see (hear) the value of analog. In that case, dump it. That said, I really think that too many audiophiles obsess too much over their analog and it begins to be a source of stress rather than a pleasure. Why? Once the turntable is properly set up, which is no big deal with a Rega, just clean the record when you get it, clean the stylus with a bit of LP#9 and play. That's all that need be done for a few years, when you have to replace the cartridge, which admittedly can be pricey. The problem is that too many people (and I've met a few) constantly live in apprehension that the tt is not ajusted perfectly and feel they have to screw around with it on a regular basis. You see posts like that here all the time - Oooh, I hear some inner-groove distortion; oooh, I hear a noise when I do this... I have yet to find a record that is absolutely perfect from beginning to end. Most will have a noise somewhere on it. It doesn't bother me as long as it is brief in duration. But, as I first stated, if you are not getting pleasure out of it, let it go.

I agree with Viridian, the problem for me is availabilty. If you have a niche interest, where some of the great recordings may never have reached digital. Jazz I suppose , is the example that springs to mind.

For Me, it is Opera. Some of the great 50's to 70's recordings, never reached CD. The other thing to consider is cost. The great Jazz recordings can be expensive. You can pick up Opera vinyl very cheap. I bought Puccini's, the gear from the Golden West with Domingo, for £3 recently, unplayed and that is a Penguin stereo guide top, Rosette, performance. What more could you ask for?

To this very day I still thank Jax2 for his decision.

Quote
"I see a lot of systems with no analog. But few if any, that have no CD player. Speaks louder than words."

Yes that's because people are inheratly lazy and will trade off sound for a lack of noise they have not learned to lessen with proper care and choices and focus on the the miniscual noise in a properly set up system instead of the music.
Always reminds me of the ones who put their ear to a tweeter and hear a faint hiss that can't be heard from the listening position yet its somehow this major issue to repair. Funny how few ever make a choice on a cartridge and its ability to play quieter than others do or at least you don't see it in the post's. Just the equipment that magnifies everything the cartridge see's and feels and introduces with poor choice.
It's a matter of taste and tolerance and the effort for each individual.
All media has trade offs in some form or another. Just listen to the music and enjoy. Cheers

If you don't get the analog thing or don't want to I'd say stick with digital. Analog done right is a chore and an expense. If it's not an enjoyable struggle/hobby for you it's not worth it. I've always been a worker anyway and when I put the time, effort and expense in I was so richly rewarded that I almost never listen to digital anymore. Digital is quite good at times and convenient. Just be mindful and OK with the fact that there IS more out there if you really want it.

I came to the conclusion after almost two decades of vinyl-dominant listening, that the expense and hassle and storage and routine was not worth it for what was becoming more and more marginal sonic benefits ( for me). Mt10425 directly benefitted from that decision acquiring the bulk of my vinyl at a pretty good price many years ago. I have no regrets and never had the urge to rebuild a vinyl rig, though I certainly enjoy others vinyl rigs. For me it was a matter of personal priorities, and those were and remain quite clear to me. Yours may of course be quite different. I mostly listen to music stored on hard drives now and enjoy it as much as I ever have.

12-30-11: Dougdeacon
Despite Rok2id's scepticism, many on this forum and elsewhere listen to vinyl with little or no problems with surface noise. I'm one of them. I'm not going to argue this point from theory. I merely cite my experience while not in any way maintaining that it's valid for anyone but me. I can't tell Rok2id what to like and he can't tell me... and neither of us can tell you!

I'm one...before getting back into analog I cited that as an issue to keep my head still stuck in the sand with digital. If you have a vinyl collection of near mint or better condition, keep your records clean and your table well sorted, surface noise and pops will not be an issue. That is my experience any way.

For people that primarily listen to pre 1990 music, it makes sense to stay with vinyl. No doubt that the engineers back then and in the early days of CD new how to master for vinyl and not CD. Since the mid 1990's, the recording studios figured it out and CDs are typically very well mastered. To each his own, for me I burned out on the music from the 70's and 80's a long long time ago. I buy lots of new music and I buy only CDs. And for the vast majority of my purchases, the sound quality is better than a 30 year old vinyl recording. Much better. And once I burn it, it will last forever.

Rok, baby. If you really listen to music first and foremost and not to what your system is doing, then you should learn to appreciate vinyl. First of all, as Doug and some others have said, the experience does not have to be as tedious and "noisy" (ticks and pops) as you seem to think. That's all I can say.

I want to thank everyone who responded, especially those who dedicated the extra time and paragraphs to the thread. Every response provided me with perspective as to how to proceed

LET ME CLARIFY, that noise in itself does not bother me as much AS WHAT IT INDICATES".... which says you should have taken better care of the records, or need to clean the vinyl with a higher quality liquid and/or a record cleaning machine. I did to a degree: VPI record sleeves, the cheapo Audio Advisor record cleaner (for awhile), and a few spray and clean concoctions. The collection totals about 60LP's, I have a few classical LP's that date from 1976 given to me as a gift by co-workers. The Deutsh-Gramophone LP of E. Power Biggs, playing Bach is excellent on every level and without noise

I have some LP's that were sourced at the local record hut, and were in fair condition when I acquired them. I now replace noisy or worn LP's with their (hopefully) remastered equivalent, and some with Japanese pressings which overall are very good, but not astounding.

The remastered disc version of Hall and Oats "Silver Album" is excellent, and not bright or edgy as some tracks on the original LP. Whereas, the LP of the Byrd's "Mr Tamborine Man" is untouchable in the emotion it conveys despite its pops and clicks. As I mentioned in the body of the thread, I recently played the new 40th anniversary edition CD of the Tull's "Aqualung".... and, yes it is missing something of the emotional guts of the Mobile Fidelity vinyl LP, but the dynamics, punch, power, and clarity of the disc is astounding.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!!!! JIM.

Rok-come on by and I'll play you a couple of records.

And to speak to your value analysis, it's a fascinating point. I went from a Maplenoll Ariadne Signature/Sony XA-20ES CD player to a Thorens 2030/Primare CD21. Same Grado Reference Sonata cartridge for both.

The Thorens is more than 95% of the Maplenoll, so the sound quality of analog hasn't taken a significant step back for me. But the quality of CD playback has improved significantly from when I was last shopping. So retail for that Primare is about $1500. Retail for the 2030 (thank the heavens for sales!) approaches $4k with the Rega 300 arm.

If you spend identical sums on analog and digital, what kind of results would you get? Good question. But only you can answer what analog is worth to you, fiscally.

This doesn't even get into computer audio, which is the next great audio frontier, a medium that is growing by leaps and bounds.

But it sounds like you've made your mind up. I'm down to about 1,000 LPs after giving away a couple hundred or so, and can't see anything making me give those up.

Also know that digital isn't really about "analog sound quality." Digital is, as others have noted, more accurate than analog. But whether it's the added "air" created by that sound of stylus contacting groove or what, I can still play the same disc on CD and vinyl for anyone in my listening room, and they will invariably prefer the vinyl.

Weird, that subjective preference. Digital isn't supposed to sound like analog. It's like when people ask about solid-state amps that "sound" like tube amps, when the ideal amp won't have a "sound," be it tube or solid state. Likewise with digital vs analog. A great recording will be great, no matter the format, irrespective of sonic artifacts.

It's your ears, and your money. Do what you want with it.

Kevvwill
Often while browsing on Amazon or some other site, I will see a CD with a great review and I will think, I have that, let's give it a listen. But when I go to the spot in my CD rack it's not there. Then I will remember, I have it on LP. I just hate the thought of trying to get into all that again. I think it will cheaper just to replace the good stuff with CD. And quieter. :)

Mt10425
we have no disagreement

It isn't "us vs them," it's both. For me, vinyl is still a more enjoyable experience, even with the occasional surface noise. I have a stereo copy of the amazing "Clap Hands, Here Comes Charlie" that at some points sounds like someone's making popcorn in the kitchen. It's still a dazzling recording.

Without question, CD players have come a very, very long way. The gap between vinyl and digital recordings, cued up on my turntable and CD player, isn't as vast as it once was. But it's still significant.

If I didn't have any vinyl, and were just starting out, I'm not sure I would bother with it. But if you have vinyl, I'm not sure why you would get out of a particular media, and replace those discs with CDs or hi-res downloads, when you already have them.

For me, I take my music in whatever form I have it in. I have the "Complete Riverside Recordings of Thelonious Monk" on vinyl, and still remember getting it, and not leaving the house for a weekend.

I also have some CDs that bring that same delight. It doesn't have to be a closed door, but rather, another open one.

Rokdude-honestly it's not an us vs them situation. You seem to want to separate yourself as some modern audio Don Quixote. But, alas, your views about listing to the music is not special. We all listen to the music. All that is different is the way it reaches our ears. Try as you might, there is no right or wrong, better or worse. Ultimately, it's about the music.

I went looking for my cd of dark side of the moon. Turns out I don't own one. Pulled out and cleaned the vinyl. It's playing now in front of me as I write. Lp12, Helikon, tubes....I couldn't be happier.

If I could magically turn everything into secure, hi-rez computer based digital, I would. But I don't have the patience to do it any of the available ways.

And such a rig wouldn't be cheap.

And I think that the lp ritual touches something from my history -- 51 now, still playing albums I bought when I was 12.

Sold a few albums when I hit 18 and got into jazz. Thought I was "over" some of the cornier parts of my rock collection, but years later wanted to hear Ambrosia sing "Nice Nice Very Nice" again. Had to track it down. May listen to it after the Floyd.

Own some modern big-money vinyl. It's mostly pretty great. The re-issue of some of the Roxy Music stuff is thrilling (among others).

What's my point? If you are actually listening to your rig -- whatever it is -- and enjoying it, be happy. If you have the money and inclination to go super digital, it's very convenient and I think it sounds as good as it is required to give immense pleasure. But if you have substantial vinyl and a credible rig, the cost of maintaining is much less than the cost (time and money) of the alternative.

YMMV and happy new year.

FWIW, I bought 15 LPs today all in excellent condition for $35. Much cheaper than drugs, motorcycles or hookers. Much safer too!

Lewm:
I agree with your statement about the early CDs and the Players. I first became aware of CD around 1985-86 in Germany. I could not afford the early players, but I had about 100 CDs before I finally got a player. I considered CD to be my prayers answered. My main audio goal was to get away from all that damn grinding click and pops and rituals in volved in playing a record. I started off thinking I would just buy classical CDs and continue with Jazz and Pop on LP. I didn't foresee the remaster thingy. I still have those first CDs. They still sound bad. I think Liszt was my first CD. Now, apparently true audiophiles can find tune their ears to hear some things and block out other noises / sounds. I cannot do that. A true audiophile can hear the difference between every amp in creation. Every piece or wire that exists. They can even hear power cords. And they get very picky about these things. But, they don't seem to hear all the shortcomings of LP. I don't get it. But it's all way above my pay grade. A Guy with a receiver and polks should not dare question the oracles. But to sum up: I listen to music. Not the gear, no critical listening, no sweet spot, no matching of components and all the rest. Just the music.

The debate never ends and gets sillier all the time. They are your ears. Please them. But I will offer a suggestion, before you drag your proverbial other foot through the all digital door, try a suspended table set up that has soul. You can always sell your Rega here or on ebay and the suspended table rig as well if you don't like it. You certainly can do this with out spending a lot of money and you might find a new appreciation for vinyl. You have a good cartridge but you may want to step up here a bit. I however, will not be in the market for your current Rega or your contemplated Rega upgrade. Not saying suspended is the only way to go but until you step up the bucks considerably I think the suspended tables are more musical. Just my opinion.

Rok2id, I respect your right to prefer digital and to revile vinyl analog reproduction. But in your initial post you stated that you abandoned vinyl immediately when the first CD players became available. That does not speak well for your audio goals; those early products and the earliest CDs made to be played on them were nothing short of horrible, and I will posit that this is a fact, not an opinion. I remember being at a party where the host was using one of the early but then well respected cdp's as a source of background music. (He had the Meridian cdp that put Booth-Stewart on the map, I think.) The sound was so amusical that I privately begged him to shut the damned thing off or to reduce the volume. So, we are all different. To each his own. Vinyl can indeed be a pain in the ass, but I love it. I have a tweaked cdp as well, and I use it for parties and as background house music, secure in the knowledge that digital has come a long way since I sat cringing before the Meridian. But when I sit down just to listen, vinyl is my choice. However, I will acknowledge that the current state of the art in digital reproduction has a lot going for it. As Cronkite used to say, that's the way it is.

Analog is much better more air,deeper stage,more depth.If you think CD is better jump on it be my guest.

Hey Inna, what is a "true audiophile"? Or for that matter, "true music lovers"? Your expert opinion and knowledge is so welcome. Enlighten us, please?

So much talk about obvious things. I don't think that the OP and a few others who commented are true audiophiles, perhaps even not true music lovers. Let's hope I am wrong.

You can raise alot of money selling your vinyl...let me know if you decide to sell...

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.

Viridian-the hero

I see I fed this beast of yours (Rok). The last time my CD player was actually used was 2009.

I see a lot of systems with no analog. But few if any, that have no CD player. Speaks louder than words.

A lot of great points on both sides so I will keep mine short...I am 100% vinyl and only have digital hooked up for break-in purposes and system warmup. There just isn't any comparison for me.

What I don't like...cleaning records and missing some of my fav artists.