The character of analog and digital

The real 'problem' with CDs is that they take the 'audiophile' out of the process.  You put it in the tray, and that's the end of your involvement.  In all other ways concerning music reproduction, they are superior to LPs.  And any other format for that matter.

If only we could 'upgrade' the lasers, or had CD cleaning machines, or could see them spinning  etc etc.  there is nothing to fiddle with!!

Cheers

@rok2id

I get where you coming from, the tactile experience of vinyl playback (starting from removing LP from shelf, admiring the exquisite art work and content, removing LP from jacket, the 5 step cleaning ritual before finally dropping the needle) all can be very fulfilling to many. That’s just one aspect of Vinyl playback, we have not even discussed the steps required to setup a turntable :-)

Now you can get most of aforementioned tactile experience from a top loading CD player and XRCD’s that features exquisite packaging and artwork. I use ahp Klangtuch IV cloth to wipe clean and remove any electrostatic charges on all of my CD’s before dropping them in my top loading Raysonic CD128 player.

 

 

@lalitk +1, @david_tenYou nailed it 🖐️🎤 ⬇️

Agreed!  David, excellent observation and perspective.

Charles

Whether analog or digital, one must try to obtain the musical message first then accommodate the ears to the particular sonic quality. Something we audiophiles find hard to do.

Only then can we make a truly informed judgement on SQ

Whether analog or digital, one must try to obtain the musical message first then accommodate the ears to the particular sonic quality.  Something we audiophiles find hard to do.

Not sure who you are referring to with this statement. I was attending live musical performances before I became aware of the High End audio world. Quite honestly, the only purpose and reason for obtaining a high-quality audio component is to better appreciate the music I adore. It merely works as a conduit for that purpose.

I still attend live venues pretty regularly. 10 performances so far this year. So, the music itself, first and foremost. The audio equipment makes it possible to appreciate it whenever I’d like to in my home. Nothing more or nothing less. I am pretty certain I am not the only one here who feels this way and behaves this way.

Charles

What I’m trying to say is that if you’re into the music first you’re more likely to make a good judgement as to whether the SQ is enhancing the musical experience.

 

I have DSD at the front end and tubes at the back end and open-baffle speakers, and I love my whole system. Not to say I won't change up when I hear better (and affordable) components, but it's the right path for me. And I keep a turntable and old records around for joy and nostalgia.

Good set of posts! I'm happy we all care so much.

Mike - good to see you weigh in with a more measured input… for those of us w fairly decent LP, Digital ( duh…CD aint it ) and high speed tape….a simple experiment of dumping a digital file on to 15 ips tape and watch the closed minded swoon….. i call it the homogenization machine…. 

There really are two camps…music lovers not stuck in 1950 - 1970 … and format religious zealots…..

and my heroes are guys like Helmut Brinkmann a master of analog…AND Digital w Nyquist II… pushing the sonic frontier forward……

 

Someone could argue, but its very much about the mastering....

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/what-sounds-just-like-the-analog-master-tape-cd-vinyl-sacd-or-a-1-1-analog-reel-tape-copy.133328/

 

 

https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-how-does-mastering-differ-vinyl-and-digital-releases

 

 

 

 

@charles1dad "

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."

I totally agree Charles. Back in August I visited Gestalt Audio in Nashville to audition some equipment. While there Colin (the owner of GA) set for me a listening baseline by cueing up some tracks on his TW Acustic vinyl rig, wonderful engaging sound. Then in the same system I listened to a Neodio Origine S2 CD player, and then the combination of Tron Electric's top of the line Atlantic GTT DAC and an Aurrender streamer (I don't recall the model number)  as its source. Both of the digital setups were thoroughly engaging, tone, timber, resolution, etc in spades. I will honestly state that to my ears the vinyl edged both out, but it was very close. I'd be surprised if open minded folks, including significant others,  listening to this very comparable/complimentary equipment would walk away stating that there was a significant difference between the sound; having a preference for whichever  one over the other certainly. I now have the Neodio in my main system.

 

 

@facten

I was introduced to a Neodio Audio CD player in the Lamm Audio room at CES some years ago. The late Vladimir Lamm was running the room. He alternated between the Neodio and an excellent turntable set up. He had his top level Lamm electronics in use. I can attest that both the analog and digital front ends acquitted themselves quite beautifully and were very engaging. So I know you must be thrilled with yours.

I have not heard the Tron Audio DAC but I am very familiar with the sound of their SET amplifiers which are fabulous. I’d have to believe that the DAC is equally as accomplished. @grannyring owns their top model DAC and he (And his wife) love what they’re hearing.

This notion that digital is not capable of reproducing music in an emotionally engaging and immersive manner is nonsense.

Charles

Lamm RIP ;-( another great loss

@facten

Thanks for sharing your experience with @gestalt. I was not aware of the Neodio Origine S2 CD player. That’s quite a piece of serious engineering and aesthetics. I bet it sounds amazing in your well appointed system. I am intimately familiar with Daedalus Audio and Modwright, they are match made in heaven.

What do you think of Wolf Langa’s and Cessaro’s.

I am looking forward to visiting Gestalt in early December. Should be a fun trip!

@lalitk Thank you for the comments, yes very pleased with the Neodio.  The Daedalus also sound very good with my Line Magnetic and Finale Audio integrated amps .

When I was at Gestalt the Wolf Langa’s were out for audition so I did not hear them. Check with grannyring, I believe that he is getting, or may now have, the Son. The Cessaro’s were great sounding fronted by a Frontiers Audio amp no matter what the source was; I’d happily own them if I was in the market for speakers.

I hope that you have a good visit; Colin makes it a good experience. And, I found him a pleasure to interact not only during my visit but also via prior and post visit transactions conducted via phone/email

 

 I listen to classical 95% of the time.  I think it’s safe to say the majority of Agoners don’t.  I put on a vintage James Taylor LP (One Man Dog) and compared it to a streamed hi res file of the same track from Qobuz. The record easily sounded better than the file. I know this is only a one title sample but I find  in classical, the reverse is more often true.  Maybe my observations will differ due the fact that I listen mostly to classical and the majority don’t.

@rvpiano It is very pointless to 'discuss' own preferncies (not directed to you) if one is not familiar with process. Seems nobody here reads the words of people who are actually responsable for the actual sound of some recording or format, like Steve Hofman in post that I ve linked before, above, or again, here, from another 'master' Kevin Grey.Here are some quotes from him as well:

… I never limit jazz or classical stuff. I’m so turned off by today’s compression just to make everything sound the same volume on itunes....

… Well there is a difference cutting for the audiophile market and the mass market. I have to take precautions on non audiophile stuff to make sure it will track on lesser systems. I use a limiter/compressor very very occasionally. Every so often vocal peaks get out of hand in rock and pop stuff and it id preferable to do a couple db of limiting instead of turning the whole song down...

from sterophile

 

Mastering while important is not the whole process….

OP… “What I’m trying to say is that if you’re into the music first you’re more likely to make a good judgement as to whether the SQ is enhancing the musical experience.”

When we go to choose audio equipment we go into analytical mode where we direct our minds eye (ear in this case)… to listen for differences flitting from sound to sound. Spend too much time picking out equipment like this only and this becomes how we appreciate a system… instead of being drawn into the music and making your decision from the perspective of the music..

Typically we are drawn to music by the subconscious, that is the need being satisfied by listening to music.

I always recommend you do a few minutes of analytical listening, but quickly switch to listening to the music and not the equipment… this will allow your subconscious latch on to the equipment which gives you the greater emotional connection… moves you. This allows one to do what I think you are referring. Listen to the music and let that be the guide… or you end up with an analytical sounding system. Where you can hear a musician move his foot… but miss the musicality and emotional connection.

 

@tomic601  +1

 

Mastering while important is not the whole process….

Picking up on the comparison to stick vs automatic shifting: "Enthusiasts" will say manual is the ONLY way (so much better than CD, ahem automatic). But they grudingly admit that automatic is MUCH faster (why do you think Formula 1 cars have digital ahem automatic since years). 

Whether analog or digital, one must try to obtain the musical message first then accommodate the ears to the particular sonic quality. Something we audiophiles find hard to do.

Only then can we make a truly informed judgement on SQ

But how do we play a CD backwards? 😁

It is very pointless to 'discuss' own preferncies (not directed to you) if one is not familiar with process. Seems nobody here reads the words of people who are actually responsable for the actual sound of some recording or format, like Steve Hofman in post that I ve linked before, above, or again, here, from another 'master' Kevin Grey.

@alexatpos 

I read. I also watch videos on YouTube describing everything that goes into making a vinyl record. Few good examples would be the Scott Hull video where he’s talking about the entire process, as well as a video from Analog Productions (it’s a tour of QRP more or less).

But in the end it is the result that matters and it is and will always be about personal preference of the end user. There are too many variables and moving parts involved. And as we see from this and other discussions, not every system is set up where analog and digital are on the same level. That alone is dictated by preference more often than not (just read thru the discussions on this thread). 

I always smile when a PDK car / driver combo laps the purist….

@ghdprentice 

I always recommend you do a few minutes of analytical listening, but quickly switch to listening to the music and not the equipment… this will allow your subconscious latch on to the equipment which gives you the greater emotional connection… moves you.

Very sage advice. Reminds me of Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

The tricky part is that the listening to music part (the feeling, romantic part) then must be taken back up into the classic part (analysis) in order to play a role in the audiophile decision. Ouroboros, all the way down. 

My other hero is Bob Clearmountain who understands a simple remaster isn’t enough….in many cases…

 i have never heard [via closed-back headphones] what some here refer to as a "black background" on any analog recording [tape or disc], there is always some background noise/medium noise or ambience. only in a large room did such become hard to hear, as the room sound would obscure such subtleties. large rooms have a background noise of their own due to structure born noise as well as air current noise working on one another. don't believe me, then whip out the decibel meter, it will tell the tale. OTOH, just about all my digital recordings have [at least between the tracks] a true black background of totally negligible hiss ][mostly from the electronics]. all my digital recordings have, for want of a better word, a slight "zing" in the extreme trebles [top of the top octave], presumably this is due to the psychoacoustic action of the steep Nyquist filters used. on upsampling digital players [i.e., ones that multiply 44.k into 88.2k or higher] i don't hear this effect. with the aforementioned "zing" out of the way, the only difference i hear is [with digital masters] is the absence of print-through, wow & flutter, and modulation noise common with analog master tapes, and of course no [disc] surface noise. for most folks, those things add a subtle "warmth" to the analog sound, but to me [i can discern 1/8th-of-a-tone variations, a side-effect of having perfect pitch] they are audible and represent a sour coloration that i'd rather not have in my music playback. just listen to the decay of sustained piano notes or high-pitched chimes, you'll hear what i mean. digital to me is just more "solid" for want of a better term. 

@tomic601 , @david_ten , @audphile1  in case and if 'all things should be equal' (from reproduction side of things, if that is possible at all) than everything comes down to the mastering. Judging by what people who are actually doing the masterings have to say (will post this again) it seems that their consensus is on analog side. The rest is all about our personal preferencies which are caused by quality of our system, analog or digital and because of it that the 'discussion' is pointless. Perhaps if the discussion is about the principles of analog or digital domain, we might have something to discuss. Without knowing how 'the original source' and consequently all other versions of some recording sound, we all, in fact, make our judgments by listening final product (analog or digital) which has been heavily 'manipulated' and has little to do with inherent quality of some format, but more of 'craft' of the person who made it   

 

" I listen to classical 95% of the time. I think it’s safe to say the majority of Agoners don’t. "

And how did you come to that presumption?

@lalitk, there are devices that avoid the need to "babysit" vinyl if one has a fully manual TT. For example, the Audio-Technica tone arm lifter works quite well and doesn't cost an arm & a leg like some others. Because of this Audio-Technica, just as with CDs, I also sometimes play LPs when I'm entertaining, cooking or what have you. I often play CDs, too, when I'm just relaxing in the living room and focused on pure music enjoyment. I certainly wouldn't say that digital sounds "inferior" to vinyl. However, as I've previously said, all things being relatively equal in a good audio system, to my ears, vinyl is definitely "better", for lack of a better term in this respect.

I've had many friends visit, audiophiles and non-audiophiles alike, had them sit in the sweet spot on the living room couch, played well recorded CDs and LPs of the same work or performance, at the same volumes, flat out and then asked them to tell me which sounded "best" or "better" to them. Without exception, the determination or preference has always been the vinyl recording. Typical comments include:  'more bass and it sounds more real'; 'sounds more real'; 'sounds more like being there'; 'everything is clearer; 'frequency response up & down the ranges are clearer, crisper, more accurate'; 'vocals sound more real or natural'; 'I could tell right of the bat'; etc.

I feel the same and this is not something one needs to listen long or hard for. Most of my friends are contemporaries in age. However, some are veritable youngsters who could be my children or grand-children and they all like vinyl "better".

As the French would say:  "Chacun so gout!" and "Vive la difference!" The important thing here is love of music!

The directness of R2R tape is not captured by digital atm. Vinyl is inferior to R2R period. Vinyl has it own drawbacks (pops, crackles, noise, channel separation, sub bass) but is the second best analog source. Digital is getting there (for example MSB/DCS) . In the CD-era (80's & 90's) 70% of the analog qualities were captured. With Hi-Res we are getting at 80-90% I think. It's enjoyable and easy to consume though.

@ghdprentice:

"When we go to choose audio equipment we go into analytical mode where we direct our minds eye (ear in this case)... to listen for differences flitting from sound to sound. Spend too much time picking out equipment like this only and this becomes how we appreciate a system… instead of being drawn into the music and making your decision from the perspective of the music."

I couldn't agree more! When doing serious seat-time with various components, over the years, those I've always come home with are those that have always drawn me out of critical listening mode and into pure music enjoyment quickest, often without me even realizing it, at first.

Yogiboy,

Based on the minuscule sales of classical vis a vis pop and rock in the general public, I think it’s a safe assumption.

I post very seldom but enjoy the more mature and informative responses which is why I also welcome Millercarbon back, and as I only listen to vinyl I enjoyed his comment!. Yes LP`s do vary far more in quality than digital musical reproduction however I wouldent want to think of how much I would have to spend on a digital system that gives me the same pleasure and involvement.

I had decent TT long time ago, but couldn’t stand pops and clicks. Perhaps it is possible to avoid them, but it is not my experience. Pops and clicks take me back to my room when I was already at the concert. As for R2R - layer to layer copying is often the problem and I could hear that. My friend worked in very large recording studio where they had separate department responsible to rewind thousands of tapes to avoid it. Many years ago they sold all the Studer tape recorders and went digital. No more rewinding silliness. Media is likely not a problem since I have few wonderful sounding CDs. CDs got bad rap from early attempts with wrong master tape frequency correction. Also, digital recording opened door to unlimited track recordings. They put microphones in front of every instrument to make sens of it later with poor results. Now they use only few microphones suspended over whole stage. Nyquist is not perfect since it applies to continuous waves only, but I doubt it makes any audible difference. I like digital for many practical reasons, but admit vinyl had its magic. I would also assume that older or very new vinyl has less compression being audiophile media. Compression is wonderful and necessary for average home system but we need less of it. I had hopes they will do it with more expensive media oriented toward audiophiles, like SACD, but greed killed the project (as it killed many other in the past).

@mikelavigne  “digital…won’t equal vinyl in my lifetime…”

 

You must have died about 35 years ago.  Thanks for making a reappearance on Halloween.

Asa manufacturer I can taylor the sound of both so although there are people who have an opinion based on their experiences, all of that can be altered.

 

Happy Listening.

I always thought I heard a lot of noise when hearing a needle tracking along a record groove.  However, it has been many years since I have played vinyl.  I need to go to a dealer to hear the difference again.  I must be missing something.

I read many years ago and agree and still think it’s true….

“To like digital you have to stop listening to analogue vinyl.”

I find the best analogue vinyl sounds much better than digital. 
the sound is relaxed and has air and ambience. 

also, much pure analogue vinyl recordings from the past sound better than their recent digitized vinyl reissues. Just about all new vinyl, reissues included, are now digitized and then converted back to analogue before pressing. New cutting lathes are digital. 
 

I hear a loss of musicality in most new reissued vinyl. 
I haven’t bought any new re-issue vinyl in the last five years after being disappointed by “digital” in your face but less musical sound on several re-issues. 

new music on a good dac sounds pretty good. 
there is no pure analogue to compare it too. 
 

but most music from the 50’s thru the 90’s sounds pretty bad in digital when compared to the original vinyl. I think we are stuck with crappy conversion from those early digital years.

@sudnh try some of the Analog Productions reissues. I’m really digging the classical and jazz these guys are putting out very good quality vinyl. 

Why do they keep saying “it sounds like vinyl” or “it’s really analog sounding”

Nearly every format of audio is compared to vinyl

im gonna stop there

Good luck Willy-T

Indeed, welcome back @millercarbon !

Were you banned or did you just take a break?

I owe you for the raves about Townshend and Better Records!

@ghdprentice 

Your digital is very close to your analog. I was stunned by your digital.

But close is only good for horseshoes and hand grenades. 
You may recall my comment about hearing the fine nature of Steven Stills’ guitar.

Only on vinyl did I hear that he was playing a great old Martin. On digital it sounded great but, overall, it did not reach that level of nuanced reality.

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.

@mglik

 

Thank you for your kind words.

I find which sounds better (analog / digital file/ Streaming) depends. You clearly are a better judge than I on the nuances of specific instruments. But in some cases I find the vinyl is just less detailed than the same version streamed, sometimes the reverse. I am not sure, but it easily could be which vinyl press or what number pressing. We would have to review a lot of albums to find an average.

Alternatively, with your professional musical background you may be more grounded in exactly how and instrument should sound. I may be deaf to some of those nuances and value some other aspect.

To me, given the variability of each medium I find them on about equal footing… one shining brighter from time to time.

But happy to have you over whenever you like to continue the experiment.

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.

@sns How is the Korf headshell?
I put one on at teh same I switched carts, and it is either the HS the cart, or the combo… but it seemed to lower sibilance,

what say you?

+1 @david_ten 

I think many are looking for an absolute truth. To accept that they are different is to believe one or the other is ‘wrong’. People should get over that. I generally try to listen to music in its original source - at first. Then I try and just listen. 
 

In my system the dynamics of analog generally overcome any concerns of a soft focus veil. What some may consider comprise others would call balance. 

@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.

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

The “horse blanket covering the speaker” descriptions always seem like a great analogy.
But I really don’t think that the cartridge resonating like a rosined up violin bow is what I want. I just wants the cartridge to wriggle from the cut track.

My analogy is that some songs were hissing like a pentacostal revival with the snakes. Now the snakes are largely gone like St. Himself, to be sure, to be sure, chased the snakes from the land.

Hi Folks,

I fear will really ruffle a few feathers with this post - as a European now living in Australia ( some unkind people call Australians- " Americans in training"), I have , perhaps a different view to contrast with the strongly Americo-centic views on AudioGon.

Digital vs Analog; yes there is a difference, but the devil is always in the detail.

Here is Digital vs Analog 101:

Years ago records were produced as  AAA recordings: Analog recording, Analog Editing and Analog Mastering ( cutting the groove), using Analog 24 track Tape Recorders. Most modern Vinyl is DDD: Digital recording, Digital Editing and Digital Mastering, so when Digital  gets into the recording chain all of the clarity and subtlety of True Analog is lost due the Digital Sampling used. Most CD/ Streaming  is DDD: Digital recording, Digital Editing and Digital Mastering, so when Digital  gets into the recording chain all of the clarity and subtlety of True Analog is lost due the Digital Sampling used.

But here is the Devil detail; There is much more variation between Analog  recordings than Digital Recordings - it was much more difficult to make good Analog recordings than good  Digital Recordings. To see this search out early 1970's Vinyl and listen to LP's like:

Parachute - The Pretty Things

Blood on the Tracks - Bob Dylan

1st Album - America

Abraxas - Santana

Red - King Crimson

Time and a Word - Yes

In Analog  days the Engineer had much more control, now you can make Digital Recordings on your iPhone. A friend of mine has a harsh comment on what happens today: "My generation put a man on the moon, yours invented the selfie stick".

To finish - I am staggered by the $sums people spend to get good Hi-Fi ( sorry High End in Yank). Just pick good kit like Denon, Yamaha, many British Amps,good speakers like Mordaunt- Short, Tannoy, Wharfedale, B&W etc. You don't need 0% Oxygen cables, just good thick wire.

If you can't set up your system correctly then it is pointless spending $1000's on kit. For Vinyl you need to understand Cartridge off-set, Bias, Set up with protractors and Hi-Fi News Vinyl, Input Capacitance of cables and Amp.

If you find god Analog Vinyl it will give you the best sound you ave ever heard, Digital is more consistant, but always has a metallic edge, a bit like Bostonians!!!!

Hope this help to put things in perspective.

Brian

 

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.