@lalitk Shazam, you got it! Both capable of providing sheer bliss! Competition between my vinyl and digital setups certainly not zero sum game, total win win! I don't understand the need to differentiate, seems one would always have to be in analytical listening mode to depreciate either format.
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.
Showing 7 responses by sns
Opinions are not the problem, problem is judgements posed as an objective truth. Vast majority of us who have both digital and analog setups may not have optimized one to same extent as other, this colors our opinion. One should state as such, in my case digital superior to vinyl, I've never suggested digital objectively superior to vinyl. Fact is best audio system SQ I've heard has been vinyl sourced, I've also never suggested vinyl objectively superior to 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. |
With recent upgrades in my digital setup I feel no more need for further upgrades. Streaming and/or digital is capable of outstanding performance, relaxed, spacious, extreme resolution, pushes all the right buttons, both for analytical and music loving mind. Anyone who claims otherwise has not heard top flight digital.
So, being long time vinyl guy, and with well over 3k albums can't give up on analog. To compete with my digital I've had to make some major upgrades to my existing setup with Technics SP10MkII and Jelco TK850L. Very recent purchases of Audio Technica ART9XA, Korf ceramic headshell, Boston Audio Mat2, Zavfino Gold Rush phono cable and Thoress Phono Enhancer phono pre will hopefully bring my analog up to digital sound quality. I made assumption I had to go big with upgrades vs present setup to compete with my digital. I'm at point with digital where if I achieved same sound quality via vinyl I'd be happy camper. |
@holmz I have yet to install any of this into system, waiting on the Thoress to arrive later this week.
Was lowering sibilance a good thing for you, or did it darken things up excessively? I did see one individual had azimuth issues with his example, seems his Korf was incorrectly manufactured, free replacement corrected this. Other than this I've only heard good things about the headshell. |
In regard to digital having more uniform sound. First off, this not true, top echelon digital equipment will expose quite wide disparities. I have wide variety of digital recordings available to me, from late 80's cd rips to post 2000 cd rips and latest high res streams. There is absolutely huge gap between those rips to later era cd rips and best quality streams.
Now, I will agree there is large differential between vinyl, I have well over 3k albums, tons of 50's-80's recordings, fair amount post 2000's. 50's, 60's era have most consistent high quality sound IMO. Starting with 70's much more multi tracking, solid state in recording studio equals much greater variability, and what sounds like records cut from 2nd, 3rd generation masters, some real crap from this era.
I'd also add less variability with modern digital is due to the remastering that's been done. I can directly compare some of this crappy 70's era vinyl to remastered streams and the streams sound much better. The remastering craze has greatly benefited digital, and newer AD converters are far superior to previous generations of these converters.
And this doesn't mean there isn't still pretty large variation with modern digital, less variability comes from the fact the weaker recordings now sound much better lessening the gap from worst to best.
Top flight digital' resolving capabilities will expose the finest differentials, homogenized digital sound is symptom of digital setup lacking resolution, noise and jitter levels need attending to. |