Turntable got absolutely crushed by CD


Long story short, i've just brought home a VPI classic 1 mounted with a Zu-Denon DL103 on JMW Memorial 10.5 with the appropriate heavier counterweight. Had everything dialed in..perfect azimuth, VTF, overhang, with only a slightly higher than perfect VTA. Levelling checked. All good. 

I did a comparison between the VPI and my Esoteric X03SE and it's not even close. The Esoteric completely crushes the VPI in all regards. The level of treble refinement, air, decay, soundstage depth and width, seperation, tonality, overall coherence is just a simply a league above from what I'm hearing from the VPI. The only area the VPI seems to be better at is bass weight, but not by much. 

I'm honestly quite dumbfounded here. I've always believed that analogue should be superior to digital. I know the Esoteric is a much pricier item but the VPI classic is supposed to be a very good turntable and shouldn't be a slouch either. At this point I feel like I should give up on analogue playback and invest further in digital. 

Has anyone had a similar experience comparing the best of digital to a very good analogue setup?

Equipment:
Esoteric X03SE 
VPI Classic, JMW Memorial 10.5, Zu-DL103
Accuphase C200L
Accuphase P600
AR 90 speakers

Test Record/CD:
Sarah McLachlan - Surfacing (Redbook vs MOV 180g reissue)



chadsort

Showing 26 responses by geoffkait

Yes, it’s chasing the dragon to some degree. A lot depends on one’s objectives and where one decides to get off the merry go round. When the early settlers moved West a lot of them decided the hardships weren’t worth it and decided to settle in the Midwest. 😛
fleschler
geoffkait No, no, no. Some high end audiophile systems bring out the finest qualities of sound from all sources, including the worst sources. Sure, I’ve trashed many recordings LP, 78 and CD based on really poor sound quality. Now, my system is so good that it elevates the sound of once were mediocre recordings/masterings.

>>>>Just as I feared. My comments were completely misunderstood. What I am saying is the more media of any and all types one has in his house the worse the sound becomes, regardless of which media you’re playing at the time. My comments have nothing to do with favoring one media over another. It kind of aimed in you, actually, I admit, since I knew you have a ton of LPs and CDs. It’s the sort of thing, unless someone points it out, you think everything’s OK, even as you accumulate more and more. Trust me, everything is not (rpt not) OK. 😬

By the way, the musician argument no longer works on me ever since I had the displeasure of listening to the very expensive system of the first oboist of the National Symphony. Maybe it’s too loud in the orchestra pit or something. Yes, I know, musicians have perfect pitch. Yada, yada
The more LPs or CDs one has the worse the sound. Ironic, ain’t it? It’s ironic because the most enthusiastic hard core audiophiles are destined to have bad sound. It is their fate. 😳
As if professional 😬 psychologists know what things affect the sound. Heck, even audiophiles don’t know all of the varibles. That’s why I say negative results of any (rpt any) audio test cannot be generalized or used as evidence, much less proof. Best to just throw those tests out. Test procedures need to be very thorough and checked by someone who knows what he’s doing. Ditto test results. Just like the big boys do. Good luck, as Bob Dylan says on the trailing wax of all of his albums. 
That’s what I’ve been saying all along. It’s the digital playback system that’s the problem. We know it has many problems. The most critical part of it isn’t even digital really, it’s analog  - the optical reading of the data. The digital part is later downstream. The digital media per se is not really the problem. In the same vein I mentioned recently that digitally remastered cassettes sound great, too, unlike their CD brethren. Rich, full, dynamic and natural.
One assumed convenience is the reason people go to streaming. Same reason eople went to CD.
You’re preaching to the wrong choir. I am a true believer in cassettes and their superiority to digital in almost every way, but especially dynamics, which is rather ironic since the big selling point for CDs from the very beginning was their hugely superior dynamic range. Cassettes are also much more realistic and richer in tone imho. But, hey, to each his own. You can cover it up with sampling and bits arguments until the cows come home. 🐄 🐄 🐄 Tape is a natural medium. It breathes.
I understand the argument. The argument is incorrect IMHO. No offense.

Granted, Geoff? Granted what? 
moonglum, thanks for the link. I’ll pass. 😃 If memory serves bits is related to resolution, not SRN. 
Whatever. It’s still not bits. Sampling rate doesn’t translate to bits, even if you’re correct about sampling and tape, which I’m not so sure about.
edgewear, there are a number of variables involved in the physical CD itself that affect the sound. These variables are independent of the recording and the CD mastering. The physical CD variables include, but are not completely limited to, transparency of the clear layer, the reflectivity of the metal layer, the colors of the CD label, the accuracy of the CD circumference roundness relative to the spindle hole, the accuracy with which the pits and lands are placed on the disc during manufacture. The degree to which scattered background CD laser light degrades the sound can be affected by coloring the physical disc and or the disc player tray.
Cassettes are cool. Better grab em up quick, though. They don’t make em any more. 
Lizzie, are you living in a cave, perchance? The German disc trimmer trimmed the outer edge of CD and cut the outer edge at an angle. The outer circumference is not perfectly round relative to the spindle hole. Less wobbling equals less jitter. An Angled edge means less scattered background laser light gets into the photodetector. And you want to be my latex salesperson? 

One secret, it’s very hush hush, so don’t tell anyone, of the Japanese SHM CDs is that the clear layer of the CDs is more transparent than standard CDs, which use polycarbonate for the clear layer. As fate would have it polycarbonate is only around 90-92% transparent. Can you believe it? 😳
No, I don’t have an explanation, other than the SHM CDs use superior materials, I.e., Super High Materials SHM. If they have secrets they’re not sharing, Japanese releases of classic rock LPs were/are outstanding, too. In fact, Japanese equipment, from headphones to Sony Walkman, to Isoclean and Furutech fuses and other tweaks, like Audio Revive, etc., tend to be outstanding in every way.
They’ve always had CDs. No mystery about that. These days I suspect death might explain why some CDs pop up at thrift stores.
Well, you’re partially correct. About 2% in thrift stores are collectible CDs. Collectible in the sense they are somewhat rare and have value. About 10-20% of the CDs are uncompressed, but extremely common CDs that collectors, not unlike your humble scribe, just don’t have room for any more or already have. You know, Nirvana’s Nevermind, Led Zeppelin 1, II, III, etc. original or 1994, Beck, Rolling Stones Exile on Main St., Beatles Abbey Rd., they’re all good, even great. They just don’t have any real value. Unless you think $2 is any real value.
edgewear
Which begs the question: will we ever see an audiophile collector's market for cd first issues and pressings?

>>>>The future is here! Check out the CDs at most thrift stores and you’ll find by and large most of them are reissues that fall under the category of aggressively compressed. That’s because collectors of which there are a great number dump them like hot potatoes. You will also find on eBay that CD reissues that are overly compressed are usually heavily discounted. Whereas early or original CDs that are not compressed sell at high premiums, if they are even available. I will not knowingly listen to compressed CDs myself. I actually look for cassettes of music I like since they are not compressed, having been produced prior to the Oudhess Wars.

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list/album?artist=Rolling+stones&album=Exile+on+Main+Street

I dunno about harsh but the 2010 issue is super compressed. Worst case scenario. That can’t be good.

Whereas the early CD is relatively uncompressed.

The Rolling Stones
Exile On Main St.1989 CD 12 10 14
Re The Blue Raincoat, yes, I know it’s supposed to be some kind of audiophile classic, but I mean, come on!
“Isolate it via springs which brings lively resonances to the game. Or solidly support the table.”

>>>>>Actually, springs can only bring one resonance to the game. And it’s relatively harmless. That’s kind of the whole point. It’s the solid support that brings many lively resonances to the game. Ironic, huh? 😳
Whatever format it is it had better be dynamic. I will not (rpt not) tolerate low dynamic range. Everything else is secondary.
They should never have ditched the cassette. It’s the best of all media. The most reliable, best sounding and least expensive. Everyone got hoodwinked. It’s all about the 💰💰💰💰
Flescher
I’ve read that the analog LP only captures 12 or 14 bits of information but in pure wave form. Digital captures sound at different bits and depth. Somehow, they both sound natural and high resolution on my system and some of my friends systems. They each have their own plusses and minuses.

>>>>>Huh! How can analog capture only 12 or 14 bits of information? It’s not digital. Furthermore, most digital media has an analog source (tape).