Generally, digital provides more detail and wider frequency response. Digital also provides higher SNR and DR. So the comb tine theory falls apart. Digital is not like that at all. Actually analog is like that. Of course, I’m not referring to stock, off the shelf digital. That obviously sucks.
The Science of Vinyl/Analog Setups
It seems to me that there is too little scientific, objective evidence for why vinyl/analog setups sound the way they do. When I see discussions on tables, cartridges, tonearms and even phono cables, physical attributes are discussed; things like isolation, material, geometry, etc. and rarely are things discussed like wow, rumble, resonance, compliance, etc. Why is this? Why aren’t vinyl/analog setups discussed in terms of physical measurements very often?
Seems to me like that would increase the customer base. I know several “objectivists” that won’t accept any of your claims unless you have measurements and blind tests. If there were measurements that correlated to what you hear, I think more people would be interested in vinyl/analog setups.
I know vinyl/analog setups are often system-dependent but there are still many generalizations that can be made.
Seems to me like that would increase the customer base. I know several “objectivists” that won’t accept any of your claims unless you have measurements and blind tests. If there were measurements that correlated to what you hear, I think more people would be interested in vinyl/analog setups.
I know vinyl/analog setups are often system-dependent but there are still many generalizations that can be made.