Stop the presses.
The character of analog and digital
Having just obtained some high quality analogue components, I want make some comments on the character of both analog and digital.
First of all it’s very difficult to speak of analog in general. Records vary widely (indeed wildly) in sonic character and quality. Digital recordings are much more uniform. When you play a digital file you more or less know what your getting. Of course some sound better than others, but there is a consistency of character. With records, it’s the Wild West. Variation in SQ and character are rampant.
Therefore it becomes very difficult to make generalizations on which categorically sounds better.
133 responses Add your response
Interesting comment. I want to agree. But as I review my experience… I don’t know.
My analog and digital (CD, file playing, and streaming) sound the same (not by accident). So, typically I stream, and sometimes play albums. I have 2,000 vinyl albums, many audiophile recording, and very well kept albums from the 50’s through present. There is a lot of variation. The late 50’s / early 60’s vinyl really stand out as jaw droppingly good. They seem to trump digital. But when I listen to a well recorded album digitally… it is really good. For instance, I was listening to a streamed version of the HR Beatles Revolver (2022?) album this morning and I just could not believe how stunning the voices of Paul and George… well the whole album… I have the whole audiophile Beatles vinyl collection from about 15 years ago. I guess I’ll have to listen to it to verify the digital sounded better.
I guess, my thoughts are, when analog has really great masters and reproduction, maybe it occasionally peaks a bit higher… but generally not. Whenever I have done head to head great recordings, I have come up with a draw… although I always want the analog to sound better. |
@ghdprentice Maybe your LP12 is a limiting factor. |
Ok. Just for fun. I compared the vinyl copy of the remastered audiophile Revolver, with the streamed exact same streamed version… 16/44mhz, the vinyl wins by a nose. But the new 2022 version 24/96 bests both… not by a huge amount, but noticeably. The streamed version has a hint of greater resolution… but of the same overall character and warmth. The important thing is… on my system. Which, on average, has equal performance from vinyl and digital.
|
Nice! @zufan |
I tend to agree with Mark Baker of Origin Live and his three pillars of sound quality: dynamics, tonality, and clarity. Even these three however can be broken down extensively. Dynamics for example can refer to the greatest range soft to loud, or the speed and magnitude of transient attacks, and so on. Tonality can mean anything from frequency response to timbre to the way some things can sound woody, or open, or closed in. Even clarity can mean many things. Most would probably say a simple sine wave has a lot more clarity than a complex chord. So it is easy for people to hear things differently. There certainly are people who hear primarily tone. They talk and talk about neutrality, frequency response, that kind of thing, with nary a comment having to do with subtle microdynamics or inner detail. Most of what distinguishes digital is its bland uniformity. This is the flip side of saying it has more consistency of character. So does McDonald’s. Vinyl on the other hand, analog in general, somehow captures much more of the original event than digital ever has, or probably ever will. How else explain what we all know, that records pressed 75 years ago sound so unbelievably good? When a bunch of audiophiles were here last year and I played them a whole side of Sinatra-Basie a couple said it was the best they ever heard. The other one that got that same comment was Belafonte at Carnegie Hall. When we changed to digital we lost half the room. True story. They all sat listening to vinyl for a good 90 minutes. Five minutes of CD was more than most of them could take. You don’t want to hear what happened when we played the same Tracey Chapman track for one woman on CD and then vinyl. At least, not if you were expecting her to prefer the CD. Don’t expect to change any minds. Like I said, people listen for different attributes. Audiophiles love to justify music appreciation in technical terms. What I have seen, over and over again, digital just ain’t all that.
|
| Post removed |
'Vinyl captures much more of the original event'? The only ones who capture anything from the 'original event' are the producer, engineers, etc. The recording sounds how they want it to sound. No reason why good digital shouldn't be as good as good analog when it comes to capturing 'original events'. |
And yet digital can be all of that. If the listeners were not engage or interested in listening to the CDs, could simply reflect the digital hardware not up to the task. Fortunately I haven’t experienced this let down with digital sourced audio components if there’re up to snuff. Both analog and digital are subject to the same range/spectrum of poor to sublime. Either is dependent on quality of the recordings and quality of the respective hardware. I’d take a deeper examination of what is being utilized and seek to improve. Digital is absolutely capable of delivering natural, captivating and exquisite sound quality if one has assembled a proper set up. Charles
|
It suddenly occurs to me - suppose analog preference is simply an aversion to the digital sound, and nothing more? Going on and on about how analog is superior this way and that way would merely be a mirror image of your aversion to digital recording. I think there’s a real distinction to be made here. There are things about digital that displease some people, and when this kind of person is introduced to analog never having having heard it seriously it’s a revelation to them. I tend to prefer the digital sound, but I have no aversion to the analog sound so there's nothing to keep me from enjoying my LPs when I listen to him. Second thing that just occurred to me: One comparison you could make to preferring analog to digital is preferring driving with a stick to driving with an automatic transmission. Automatic is easier and more convenient, but you might find driving standard shift is more enjoyable to you. |
The question is, and has been answered here and elsewhere ad nauseum, is what is being discussed a feature of the media or the many issues related to the recording and engineering of that recording. Judging by many comparisons between vinyl and CD, I have little faith in the skills of the geeks with hats who have an ejucaton in marketing or advertising and who pretend that they know some stuff about the fine art of producing quality music in the digital domain. In the USA there still exists capital punishment. Doesn’t work. |
To wit - grabbed a legitimate CD of Aqualung last week, and it is painful to listen to. Compared to the worn out vinyl I have from about 1971, the comparison is interesting. Ian Anderson provides a short discussion, and his voice is just perfect. So, this is not a fault of the hardware or the software, but that of the dolts who are pushing the buttons. |
@millercarbon I looked at your system. We’re talking serious level analog source. And that was compared to a CD played on the modified OPPO DVD player? Or was there another digital source that’s a bit closer to the level of your analog that you used for the comparison? Just curious. As to the character of analog and digital, in my system it’s mostly about different sound between the analog and streaming that I enjoy, although I do have few MoFi and Analog Productions albums that I prefer to streaming but those are exceptions. The two types of media have their pros and cons that have been discussed and described at length on these forums. |
@heretobuy -- Over the years I've had more stick shift cars than automatics. Right now I enjoy the hell out of my six speed manual Mazda Miata. It has the best gearbox I've ever had. Better than the ones in any of my BMWs. Certainly better than the manual trannies in my Mercedes Benzes or the Brit cars I've driven. Or the manual tranny Peugeot I rented in France. I gotta say, though, that it's still a dead heat for me between analog and digital. The game is over for me. They both win, |
Oppo long gone. The digital was modern high end and brought by a guy certain it would put my vinyl to shame. Instead it was his wife that released a sigh of unexpected pleasure practically the instant the stylus touched down. The two reactions I would pay money to have recorded, that one and the other guys wife who when her husband wasn’t looking whispered to me, "I could listen to this all night!" In a tone of amazement, because her audiophile husband having only CD she never even imagined music on a high end system could sound like, you know, music. |
@millercarbon +1 Happy to see you back. I have missed your input. |
Many times it’s the quality of the digital dac , and corresponding ,Ethernet hub, like a uptone ether regen , at decent cost ,or the much Much better still synergistic research that’s 3 x as much ,you need very good quality usb cable I spent $1500 on a final touch audio Sinope ,but anythjng over $500 is respectable ,the most musical usb under $800 the Final touch audio Callisto ,which I have in my 2nd system. from Lampizator also worth every $dollar Ethernet cables at least decent quality ,minimum at least $200 on the input on the end point is what counts most around $1k for a Ethernet cables as the adage goes hav3 no weak link in the chain. |
Well, the vinylphiles better hang on to their lps from back in the day, because due to tape storage issues most reissues have to go through a digital phase, as the MoFi mess shows. So enjoy using those expensive analog rigs to extract digital files from slabs of fossil fuel, and keep getting all teary eyed Pavlovian responses when you hear the needle drop, and let’s all move on |
“Digital is absolutely capable of delivering natural, captivating and exquisite sound quality if one has assembled a proper set up.” It’s no surprise to see millercarbon putting down digital. Nothing will change his mind! Now that he’s back, just enjoy the freshly cooked up stories on Vinyl triumph over Digital in his mid-fi system 🍿 As @noske pointed out, the discussion here is about feature of the media or the many issues related to the recording and engineering of that recording. A well recorded piece of music properly transferred to physical media or streaming platform should sound great as long as your system is properly setup to re-produce that recording. |
The time honored unsolicited audiophile wife (Long suffering no doubt) comments as a prop for added/confirmed legitimacy. Still there remains the issue of them simply lacking the opportunity to have heard better quality digital sources for which to compare. So, very limited exposure/data base. Why is it so difficult to acknowledge that both formats are quite music rendering accomplished if done right. Sigh!!! Charles |
In most digital v. vinyl discussions I've encountered, the burden of proof seems to be on the digital side. Seems to me, it should be the other way around. Vinyl is subject to damage from dust, heat, and wear that do not affect digital. Turntable belts stretch, needles wear. So a fair comparison should be under real-world conditions, between a moderately worn vinyl record and a digital recording of the same performance, where both are played through electronic components of comparable quality. And to be fair, really, the turntable and stylus should be compared after accruing some realistic amount of play time. Prove that the moderately used vinyl, played on a moderately used turntable, with no history of herculean maintenance efforts, has no more audible noise (pops, static, skips, etc.) and just as much dynamic range as the digital recording of the same performance. If not, then convince us that the vinyl has other superior qualities to compensate for the audible noise. Even if we're comparing pristine vinyl recordings to digital, I've never seen convincing evidence that the vinyl SQ is superior. By "convincing" I mean, supported by either (a) objective measurements, or (b) expert testimony. Anything less is anecdotal. Not saying it's wrong, not saying it's right. It's your opinion. But the fact remains, digital is far more convenient, it is not subject to wear and tear, and the majority of listeners seem to prefer it (rightly or wrongly, for reasons that may or may not emphasize SQ). I have not listened to vinyl for many years, so I admit, maybe I'm missing something about the sound quality. But I know I don't miss the dust, the warping, the worn needles, the stretched belts, etc., or all the accompanying maintenance fuss. |
There's a robust audio club here in the greater New Orleans area. Great group of guys. Fully analog; with some dipping their toes into digital. I've heard, maybe three dozen, vinyl systems. Two stand out and I'd love to transport those into one of my rooms. One is in Houston and the other just outside of New Orleans. If I had to choose, I'd take the Houston system over the local one but I'd be blessed to have either. As someone who is one hundred percent streaming digital there is one commonality that stands out to me about the thinking and approach towards digital from those I know who are fundamentally analog audiophiles: That digital should be easy and deliver without much effort. I find this especially surprising given the effort and years it has taken them to get to where they are in terms of sound quality and performance from their analog systems. The second standout point, in my experience, is spending pennies on the dollar for digital when their budgets for the analog side of their systems are up there, way up there. Digital takes effort and expense and experience. When executed correctly the results are stellar. |
in a perfect world, digital should be close to ’of a piece’ with analog. in other words, you ought to be able to switch back and forth from digital to analog/vinyl or analog/vinyl to digital and while the analog/vinyl is farther down the road to suspension of disbelief, the digital is getting there less only by degrees. digital is never getting all the way there, but.....it does not have to. digital brings us access to much more music, and ease of use. and so we can live with ’of a piece’ synergy with our analog. and this is where i think i am in my digital and analog. and i am as much invested in my analog and my digital as anyone here. i do respect that some don’t agree and see the chasm between digital and analog as much greater; they need to work on their digital. or at least recognize what digital can do at the tip top of the digital food chain. |
“As someone who is one hundred percent streaming digital there is one commonality that stands out to me about the thinking and approach towards digital from those I know who are fundamentally analog audiophiles: That digital should be easy and deliver without much effort. I find this especially surprising given the effort and years it has taken them to get to where they are in terms of sound quality and performance from their analog systems. The second standout point, in my experience, is spending pennies on the dollar for digital when their budgets for the analog side of their systems are up there, way up there. Digital takes effort and expense and experience. When executed correctly the results are stellar.” +1, @david_ten You nailed it 🖐️🎤 ⬇️
|
Welcome back! Shouldn’t we compare recent releases of digital and vinyl rather than waxing lyrical about 70 year old recordings where the digital release is cheap and cheerful mastering because you otherwise can’t make money on it? Claiming outright superiority of vinyl givien fast progress on digital seems a bit outdated. |
your postulate of asymptotical closing of the gap between vinyl and digital seems counterfactual: vinyl suffers from distortions simply not present in digital, e.g. tracking angle on conventional tone arms, warp and flutter depending on pressing quality, imperfect reconstruction of the RIAA curve in the analogue domain, tonearm, step-up and analogue cable distortions to name but a few. Admittedly harmonic distortions on vinyl are euphonic and therefore often preferred to the ‘cold glare’ of digital, that however doesn’t mean they aren’t distortions. I fully agree with @lalitk that digital needs lots of work and am well aware of your state of the art setup on both vinyl and digital. |
With recent upgrades in streaming setup...still in evaluation phase, I'm finding both more and less uniformity in digital recordings. More in the sense I don't hear major differences between 16/44 and various degrees of up and over sampling. Less in the sense of I now have the ability to choose various music players, for instance Roon, HQPlayer, Stylus EP, two machine or single machine streaming, and much, much more available from proprietary operating system that allows a variety of streamer settings. Every single iteration has unique sound qualities to the point I've yet to determine a favorite, point being one can manipulate digital sound to have entirely unique sound qualities, love this about digital, although can be a pain at times!
I agree most of my best vinyl from 50's, 60's, analog became much less uniform once we come to the 70's, I always believed this due to solid state entry into recording studios and multi tracking. 50's, 60's mostly all tube equipment in studios, many recordings pretty much live in nice sounding recording studios.
With the recent streaming upgrades I've now been motivated to finally upgrade my analog setup, in midst of those upgrades with more planned. Made a decision I couldn't give up on vinyl, damn sound quality, even with lower resolution vs my digital is deserving of major upgrades to challenge my digital resolution.
Bottom line for me, both digital and analog capable of damn fine character. |
Here's another two cents' worth! Just couldn't resist! There is a plethora of variables at play here, just as the respondents or contributors to this post have already pointed out, to boil this down to anything other than personal preference (e.g. quality of system components, not the least of which are the TT, cartridge and phono stage; recordings themselves; sound engineering; mixing; recording studio equipment, mixing panel, microphones, microphone placement, etc.; vinyl soup mix used in any given stamping plant; not to mention quality control procedures employed, if any; quantity of LPs stamped from the Master Disc, not to mention processes involved making those discs; how LPs were and/or are cared for; acoustics, in general; personal audiology; etc.; etc.; ad infinitum). All things being relatively and generally equal in this respect, my ears prefer good quality, well recorded LP albums to anything I've heard in the digital realm, thus far, including the best Digital Master CD recordings and high-resolution streaming I've done serious seat-time with on state-of-the-art systems in high-end audio shops, through Qobuz and other services. The highest quality digital sources I've heard come very close, for sure. However, my ears still prefer vinyl, so far. I keep saying "thus far" and "so far" because I want to keep an open mind about this, although I'm skeptical that digital can or will ever be able to match vinyl in this respect. It's just different. I simply do not understand the technology enough. To my ears, anyway, it seems digital just can't capture the open, airy and quiet space(s) of whatever room, hall, recording studio or wherever the performances were recorded. It's as if that is homogenized out, if that makes any sense. I can't explain it any better than that. Seems paradoxical, I know. One cannot hear dead quiet silence. However, I'm convinced most people can feel it. I always find that sense of dead quiet silence or sense of spaciousness captured by the best vinyl recordings missing from even the best digital media. Again, this is just a personal preference. I'm not trying to start a food-fight here. Most times, I tend to play my CDs when I'm in the kitchen cooking or entertaining friends because they are definitely more convenient, quicker and easier. I play my LPs when I can actually sit down in the living room and fully enjoy the music I want to hear. When I've compared good recordings of live performances I've attended, my ears always feel the vinyl renditions come a bit closer to the live event than the digital ones. Could there be an auditory neuroscience factor involved because I just simply grew up with vinyl? Hell, if I know! I'm not a scientist, but my ears know what they like. |
i guess i’m cursed with this whole listening thing. i find the best possible digital and vinyl sources, develop my system to tell me the truth without compromise, then listen to both every day. and draw my conclusions. all the rest is noise, obfuscation, and rhetoric. you are welcome to join me anytime for listening and point out where i’m wrong. seems obvious. certainly there are good, better, best recordings too. so each digital and vinyl event has variables. the media is 'more' variable with vinyl. |
I enjoy listening to music because it evokes emotions. In my experience using my system the sound between analog and digital is very close and I can listen to either for hours. There are certain recordings I’ve compared analog to digital and when they are the same file it’s hard for me to distinguish the difference; however, I have noticed some recordings where I prefer the version and sometimes the version I have is LP and other times there’s a digital version that I prefer. Finally I often wound if my preference is based on the emotion evoked or remembered as a result of listening to the music. |
let’s just say, digital won’t quite equal vinyl in my lifetime and i’ll go with that. just follow the dollars, there is no economic driver causing digital to be improved right now enough to bridge that gap. god knows i've pushed my digital to the very outer reaches of performance. i’m no techie knowing the future, i just listen and observe trends and cause and effect. |
“I tend to play my CDs when I’m in the kitchen cooking or entertaining friends because they are definitely more convenient, quicker and easier. I play my LPs when I can actually sit down in the living room and fully enjoy the music I want to hear.” I respect your preference/sentiments for Vinyl and for keeping an open mind. However, I can’t imagine anyone rushing back to pick up the stylus in the middle of cooking or a conversation so by design one must babysit Vinyl playback to enjoy 20 min or less playing time. |
Another aspect I find interesting is the desire for and expectation of sameness / similarity. Roughly one-third (to half) of the front end of each system type is radically different. For illustration, I get a significant difference in sound based on a single power cable swap. I’ve had cable adapters influence the sound of the system. I expect that an analog system or a digital system will sound different...because they are actually and materially different. |
