Turntable got absolutely crushed by CD

Hi Chadsort.

I’m not going to try solving your problem for you, as I don’t have the expertise with turntables others have. Though I’m a long time audiophile and have owned a turntable for many years, it’s only very recently that I dove in with much seriousness into higher end vinyl playback.

And since you asked about people’s experience comparing digital to vinyl playback, that’s what I’ll respond to.

(BTW trying to answer if one has used the "best of digital" playback is always going to be contentious and somewhat subjective, where one can always hear retorts "THAT DAC or CD player isn’t great, this OTHER one is great!" So I’ll just state I use a Benchmark DAC. If it’s good enough for the pro market, it’s good enough for me...though I’ve also owned high end Meridian CD players and DACS)

We have to be careful not to fall for audiophile hype, as it tends to be mostly subjective. When we hear things like "vinyl CRUSHED the CD in sound quality" that’s pretty much someone’s subjective opinion, not some objective fact that entails we will agree. And, of course, you can always bet that you’ll hear from other audiophiles that, if you don’t agree their most beloved format sounds great, then they’ll point to some flaw in your equipment or set up. (Or worse...your faulty hearing. It’s always "your gear, or your ears.")


To that end, I’ve never been down on digital at all, and have mostly used digital playback since the early 90’s. Loved it. It does help no doubt that I "sweeten" things somewhat with tube amplification, but when vinyl fanatics say silly things like "digital is just wrong, it doesn’t sound natural, it can’t provide true musical satisfaction" they are just speaking of their own biases. I’ve loved my digital playback for decades, including getting in to ripping my CDs to stream them, and Tidal streaming.

As for turntables:

For many years I owned a nice Micro Seiki turntable given to me by my father-in-law. I’d used it occasionally to dip in to some of the records I’d kept from my collection (I’m 55). I was always taken aback by how enjoyable the sound was. It did not sound as accurate as the digital sources, but it had the classic warmth and texture, spaciousness etc that made it a really nice place to visit.

As the "vinyl revival" gathered pace, I couldn’t help notice all the wonderful albums, both old and re-issued, and new, that was being released, and often with really beautiful aesthetics in art and design. So I started buying more vinyl. And at some point it made sense to look at upgrading my turntable. (Because...hey...that’s what we do here).

Once I did upgrade my analog front end - a nice phono stage, and trading my Micro Seiki for a sturdy, serious Transrotor magnetic drive turntable, with a far better cartridge thrown in the deal, that turned a corner for me.

I’d never heard vinyl sound so quiet in terms of background noise. Nor so smoothly detailed and clear. Where my previous turntable set up had a "warmth" it tended towards a constant coloration, and a slight homogenizing of the sound with that pleasant coloration. The upgraded system revealed more tonal nuance, accuracy, realism, subtlety and range. So what I was getting now was a sound that retained the general virtues I liked in vinyl - that analog ease, richness and warmth, but with a clarity and lack of noise that was more similar to the virtues of digital.I found it astonishing how I could hear so clearly into any mix on a decent record, how low in distortion it sounded. There was more of "hearing a master tape" vibe listening to good vinyl, with that combo of warmth, ease AND amazing clarity and detail.

So now I actually tend to prefer listening to vinyl over my digital source. I don’t think, generally speaking, that the vinyl is technically better. Only that the set up I have now seems to have a beautifully balanced combination of the artifacts that make vinyl sound appealing while providing an amazing sense of insight into the recording that I’m used to with digital.

It’s just a subjective take, not "one is better than the other" and I still really like my digital source in terms of sound quality. But records are more satisfying and fun to play as well.

One issue, as it seems you are experiencing, is that it DOES take a while to dial things in right. Near the beginning the sound I had was a bit on the thin side. Later a bit too lush. Finally I got a nice balance where I can stop fiddling. Most of this had to do with finding the right vertical tracking force combined with choosing the right impedance for my cartridge. My phono stage allows convenient front-panel switching between impedance and I take advantage of this. Sometimes I like the impedance a click lower than strictly accurate, as it can make the sound a bit more spacious, rich and lush. Most of the time I have it so the tonal balance sounds like a match for my digital sources (as a benchmark of accuracy).

Having compared a number of digital versions to LP versions, most of my preferences go toward the LP versions. Talk Talk’s Right Of Spring album, for instance, came out with a new master session on both CD and LP several years back. Comparing back to back, my LP sound gives me all the detail I hear from the CD version, but with that slightly more compelling textural, tonal presence that seems to make things a bit more present, the speakers seem to "disappear" a bit more. This is generally the case when I compare the LP vs digital. Though I have had some cases where the digital was clearly "better" in terms of accuracy, and even showing more detail, separation, information. And yet even in those cases, where the LP wasn’t showing me as much info, there was still some aspects of richness and presence that let me enjoy the LP as well.

So, that’s my story.


I certainly agree with others that, especially as you’ve already sunk some time and cost in to vinyl playback, it’s worth sticking with it, because it really does take some time to get right...or at least to nudge towards the sound you find most pleasurable.

I was really just too lazy to bother dumping or selling my old LPs I accumulated while growing up.  They sat at my mother's place for years so they were available when I decided to re-visit them.

digital is getting pretty good these days.

I think digital got beyond pretty good to excellent long ago.I had a Meridian 508.20 cd player in the 90's and onward, and it sounded beautiful and quite "analog."  Today I use a Benchmark DAC and it sounds fantastic too (even though I have a high end turntable system, digital sounds wonderful too).

@inna

By the way, I disagree with those who think that good digital is less expensive, I think exactly the opposite.

That’s cool.
But then I suggest you should change the following:

You really need extremely expensive equipment to make digital tolerable.

To "I" really need extremely expensive equipment to make digital tolerable.

Because of course you really are just talking about yourself. I’ve found digital more than tolerable since the 90’s - I have luxuriated in the beautiful sound quality of music through my various systems over many decades, using digital sources. I’m far from alone.

(Not to mention, like any parent I have kids who only use digital sources for their music and they are DEEPLY moved by their music. I stream digital all the time in my car and I LOVE it).

There is a tendency from the further reaches of "both sides" of the digital/analog debate to see one’s own experience as some objective fact about the nature of the medium. "I don’t like digital so there must be SOMETHING about digital that is wrong or unnatural to the human desire for natural sound." It’s just one’s subjective take; it’s not a universal.Same goes for those who say "vinyl is crap, digital is obviously better."

@snowdog212

I have to echo the sentiments some others have expressed.

I'm not sure how to reconcile your observations about all the terrible surface noise obscuring the delicate musical content on LPs, with my own experience of vinyl on my system.

One of the most surprising and gratifying observations I had upon upgrading my old turntable and cartridge to my new system is how low the noise floor seems to have become on most records, and how incredibly clear and finely rendered even the most delicate musical detail is.

When I play LPs for some of my musician pals, they often comment it sounds as silent (in terms of record noise/hiss) as a CD.  I'm constantly amazed at how the tiniest musical detail just seems to go the edge of audibility.  I often can't even hear the noise floor on an LP.  Even when there is a slow fade out of a song, often it seems to fade slowly to the very edge of audibility and disappear in to blackness.   Not all records, of course.  But on a good portion of my records.


Now, I'm not going to jump on the 'your set up must be crap' bandwagon, as I don't have the greatest turntable one can buy, and yours sounds like it should be excellent.

So all I can do is notice how utterly different my observation and experience seems from yours.   Weird.

@glupson

Re: record storage.

That certainly is an issue. I’ve dived deep in to vinyl in the past couple of years and I find it completely energizing in terms of my passion for music and for listening to my system. 

Yet I also don’t want to end up featured on the TV show “Hoarders.” I absolutely love the physical aspect of LPs, but also don’t want to be overrun with them. So it’s definitely a battle - the desire for buying new LPs and having a place to store them. I’m not remotely close to the situation many are in here who have thousands of LPs. I think I’m probably around 400 or so at most.
But even then, I had my albums stored and displayed looking nice, neat and aesthetically pleasing. But now they are starting to overflow to look a bit more intrusive. So...on to new storage units.

I think something that naturally restrains me is that I’m not what I’d think of as a “record collector.” The distinction I make there is that a “collector” denotes for me one who collects for the sake of “collecting.” (Not necessarily purely, but that is a significant component). So a collector, to me, is someone who may for instance be a “completist” where if they like a band, they are driven to get every album available, or every pressing available of an album or whatever “for completion sake” to complete a set. Whereas I’m driven to buying an LP strictly on the basis I want to listen to that album. I’m not saying this is some more benighted motivation than the collector at all. Only denoting my approach from what I often see in folks who seem to like the “collecting” aspect as much or more than the music.

I was a comic collector for many years. So for instance, it was important for me to have “Spiderman 1 - 100” as a completed portion of that collection, whether I cared for every comic in that collection or not. I just don’t have that inclination anymore.

I often see vinyl fans bemoaning the fact that so much new vinyl is produced from digital masters.  Some say "why bother buying a vinyl made from a digital master, doesn't it just defeat the point?"

Not for me.

I buy both old vinyl albums and tons of new vinyl releases. I'm especially a fan of soundtracks, which are getting killer releases on vinyl.  But I still buy a band's album if it's out on vinyl, be it surf-rock, folk, jazz, electronica, or whatever.

Even if the master was digital, I get the "vinyl experience" of the beautiful artwork, the tactile nature of the object, owning the music, playing it on the turntable etc.   And most of it sounds utterly fantastic on vinyl.
First, it's not like they are just making rips from red-book CD.  A good new vinyl album starts with high res audio files, and it's mastered for vinyl.   That in itself can make a bit of sonic difference.  (And the vinyl can even eek out more dynamic range than the digital release, if the digital release is squashed for 'loudness wars' type delivery).

So the vinyl starts with high res audio, picks up some "flavor" from the vinyl remastering, and then we still have the nature of playback via phono pre-amps and getting the sound from vinyl through the cartridige/turntable.  I think that process in of itself results in some of the "vinyl" sound.   It certainly seems to in my system, as I still often get a sort of "different" texture and presentation via the vinyl playback of an album vs it's digital counterpart, and I often prefer the vinyl presentation.

So, I have no problem buying LPs just because they may have started with a digital master.  I get all the same fun out of the physical aspects of buying the LP version, and they can sound fantastic.  It's not like an analog master guarantees good sound quality.  A number of my LPs from digital masters sound better than those from analog masters.

Holy cow, we are still getting the old myth "digital doesn’t capture the complete soundwave, but analog does!"???

It’s no wonder people who know something about digital lose patience with the bogus arguments raised by vinyl lovers.

There are various reasons why vinyl tends to sound different from digital sources. The myth that digital can’t reproduce the full musical waveforms, as if it’s "missing" audible information that an analog medium isn’t, is not one of them.

glupson,

Yes, there certainly are some ironically named users on this site ;-)

Whereas Cleeds’ info was good, and presented fairly and with civility.

 Welcome to the club chcumo63!

Careful about vinyl - it seems to have a particularly addicting quality and the ability to drain bank accounts ;-)   (Especially if you are in to new vinyl, good quality or rare).

I have never wanted to be one of those "vinyl is better than digital, 'cause digital sux!" converts to vinyl.

But...my goodness vinyl is seductive!

Since I've been listening to so much vinyl it's skewed my perception of digital a little bit.  Digital still sounds tremendous on my system and I love it.  But I was listening to a nicely recorded collection of old synth music streaming (full CD quality) on my system.  As great as it sounded, I couldn't help but think "it seems to be missing something...I'm not quite getting what I get from vinyl."  The imaging was dense, the instruments appeared in the air, but it didn't quite have the next level of immediate texture and aliveness I've been used to.  Wondering if it was in my head I yet again threw on some vinyl to compare, an old Human League LP from the 80's, similar synth era as the one I was listening to on digital.

Well...there it was!  The synth parts on the vinyl just seemed to break out of the recorded "canned" barrier and just peirce the air in front of me, occupying the same air as the room.  There was that reach out and touch it texture.  The sound seemed to jump out of, escape the speakers better.

Pretty wild.  I'm hooked.

glupson,

What it means, I suspect (and from what I've read, and though many may protest) is simply that the vinyl sound can be captured by digital.  Which makes sense to me.

I don't do needle drop recordings for various reasons.  My system isn't set up for it.  But I have no desire.  If I'm listening to vinyl, I want the whole experience.  I also have left over mental aversions to digitizing my analog front end signal....those audiophile genes kicking in.  I just like the division between fully analog and digital sources.  If I sent everything through a digital converter it could actually make my life easier as it opens everything up to using digital room correction (though, frankly as my system stands I don't hear a need).   Though this aversion to digitizing my vinyl signal raised it's head when I bought some subwoofers (not yet integrated).  The subs don't have their own room correction and I will be splitting the signal between the mains and the subs.  I know room correction can come in really handy for subs and that would entail digitizing at least the signal from the analog front end to the subwoofers.  This would at least keep the signal fully analog to the main speakers, so I think I can wrap my head around that.   Damned audiophile genes!

I asked my young 40 year old neighbor, if any of his friends who he went to college with, were into records or CD's; "Neither", he replied, "They're into streaming"

I have my doubts about all these young people into records;

In contrast to that: I've been surprised by the number of my kid's friends - and the kid of my friends - who are aware of vinyl records and who play or buy them.  Just tonight I was out with a pal and both his sons, 14 and 17, played vinyl records.
These days when my kids bring over friends they aren't mystified when they notice my turntable.  Rather it's more "Oh yeah, we have records too, my parents have a turntable."   I never heard that until recently.
Also, while there has been a second hand record store around the corner from me for decades, in the past few years it's been joined by many other new record stores, so now I have 4 record stores within about a mile of my home.   All seem to be thriving.  Quite a change from the 90's and early 2000s!

Apros of what I mentioned earlier in the thread:

I just received a copy of one of my favorite movie scores, Jerry Goldsmith's score for Start Trek the original motion picture. 
It was remastered by La La Land for both digital and vinyl release not long ago, both from a high quality digital master.

The vinyl version is just glorious.  It's clear, rich, huge sounding, silky strings, clear grain free top end, soaring horn section, and huge dynamics.  In some ways it sounds better than I've ever heard it before.This is why I'm ok with vinyl sourced from digital masters as well as analog.  If it's a great master, it's a great master. 


I seem to have somehow misplaced my original copy of this LP from the 70's, but I've ordered a (supposedly) mint version from discogs, so I'll be able to compare it when it arrives.  I may like some things better about the original anolog, I don't know, but in either case I'm extremely pleased with this version.

ALSO:  I don't really think it takes super expensive turntable/phono stages/cartridges for vinyl to compete with digital.  Previous to my current Transrotor table, I had an old Micro Seiki DD-40 Turntable, with the original arm, and an Ortofon MC 20 Cartridge which originally came with the table in the 80's (all bequeathed to me by my father in law, years ago).  Then through a cheap Rotel solid state phono stage.  It sounded so amazing it got me on the road to buying new vinyl (which of course led to the turntable upgrade bug).  The sound from the Micro Seiki set up
wasn't as accurate sounding as my digital source, bit it did all the magic vinyl things - warmth, clarity, organic quality.  In sonic terms it was a yin-yang thing between digital and turntable.  I wouldn't say one was "better" than the other, but there were certainly many times the sound from the turntable made me swoon with music in ways the digital did not.

Upgrading my turntable and phono stage brought more refinement, getting it closer to a best of both worlds presentation for me.  But I didn't have to buy my more expensive table to have experienced "vinyl magic."People's mileage will vary, of course.

analogluvr,
Yes it sure was a good table!  Had to go quite a bit further in build quality/engineering (and new cartridge) to do better.

I've continued to purchase many (obscure) vinyl albums from the glory days of analog recording and I am so often gobsmacked by the sound!It can be utterly glorious, in a unique way that I often don't get from my digital source.  It exhibits the texture, body, spaciousness and richness that makes my heart melt.   Digital is still great, but it seems I now sometimes have a need that can sometimes only be met by a great vinyl album.

Edgewear, that’s your diplomatic way of putting it, but there are clearly two distinct camps here; "sound lovers" and music lovers.

I disagree.

There’s no such clear distinction IMO.

First, everyone is here due to some level of interest in or devotion to the technology portion of sound reproduction. That’s why you or anyone else is on a site devoted to discussions of the technology.

And the degree that one focuses on the technology part, or the "sound" of a system, won’t vary in some hard edged way among members: there will be a spectrum, a continuum, not some obvious divide. In fact, I’d say for many if not most of us, we will go through swings even individually - some periods were our attention is mainly on the music (maybe once we hit some period of either fatigue with vetting new gear, or we've reached some level of satisfaction), and some periods where we are back concentrating on the technology.


And we always care about the sound to some degree, at least when it comes to our high end systems...that’s why we are here!

Whenever someone says "there are music lovers and then there are sound lovers" you can bet they put themselves in the "music lovers" camp. It’s a sort of self-re-assurance one is in the more pious of the two camps because, really "it’s all about the music," right? :)

@rauliruegas

Dear @prof 1 : IMHO there is a wide distance between sound lovers and MUSIC lovers and for the adjectives you used to explain sound characteristics in your last post for me you are not a MUSIC lover

What rubbish. You don’t know me. There’s nothing wrong of course with loving sound quality - again if YOU didn’t care at all about sound quality YOU wouldn’t be on a site like this. We all care about sound quality here.

But the idea that I’m not a music lover is flat out ignorance on your part. Gee...I only grew up with a mother who was a piano teacher, a father who was a music teacher and jazz musician, our house had several pianos, drums, synthesizers, saxes, trombones, clarinets, guitars and more and we all played music. I played since I was young, played in bands for many years, and have had a voracious musical appetite my whole life, and I’ve continued to search for and order CDs and LPs from all over the world, especially when I get obsessed with a certain type of music.

So, please, don’t go telling me what I like or don’t like. It’s judgemental snobs like you that give audiophiles a bad name.

Hence it’s worth a repeat of my previous comment:

Prof: "Whenever someone says "there are music lovers and then there are sound lovers" you can bet they put themselves in the "music lovers" camp. It’s a sort of self-re-assurance one is in the more pious of the two camps because, really "it’s all about the music," right? :)"

Thanks tomwh.

It’s funny that raulirugas shows his hand with his last sentence " enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS."


A sentiment that could only come from someone invested in the SOUND of a system. Most people could happily listen to music through systems with the type of distortions raulirugas woud likely decry, because they are focused on the music, without worrying about the teeniest distortions. Only someone really in to SOUND would have motivation to go on diatribes or evangelize about certain types of equipment, distortion profiles etc.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that ;-) But that’s the problem of being all judgemental and trying to separate people in to camps, and "other" them (when it’s all much more diverse and complex than these simplistic divisions). In a place like this anyone who claims "YOU are interested in sound, I am interested in music" is casting the first stone.


As I said, all of us here care about the sound of our systems. (How music sounds via our system). And plenty of us can still enjoy music in other situations as well. I often listen to music right out of my iphone speakers (it’s often the most convenient way depending on what I’m doing) and I get musical joy from that too.

those kind of adjectives ( that are " audiophiles " adjectives. ) no one can find out in a live music event seated at near field (1m-2m- ) at true live SPLs.

@rauliruegas


Nonsense.

And something of a red herring as well.

First, when I hear live un-amplified voices and instruments, one of the first words that come to mind is how rich the sound is.  (As I've expressed many times on this forum).  Whether I'm playing an instrument myself, or listening to someone else.

Secondly, when I attend the symphony, I tend to prefer closer seating and I ABSOLUTELY perceive both the richness of the instruments - richer in terms of fullness, presence and timbrel complexity than typical reproduced sound - and spacious as all get out.  No consumer system I've ever heard can even come close to the spacious scale of a live orchestra.

Today my main target is not that spaciousness/richness or other sound lovers adjectives but to stay truer to the recording that for me means leave all my room/system generated/developed distortions/ everykind and everywhere at minimum.
That puts me " truer to the recording " and nearer to the near field live music. Yes I know I'm far away from here but that is my target.

And those are all "audiophile" targets.  You are no more "purer" in your persuit of music than anyone else here.  So please don't throw stones in glass houses.

My dear @prof  all music lovers and sound lovers invested in the SOUND system.I started that way and still I am enjoying the SOUND of my system.

Right...therefore the division you (and some others) make between "sound lovers" and "music lovers" is bogus.  One can enjoy both aspects - in fact they are obviously interlinked, given it's sound that we are responding too.

If music were only about the notes being played and not the specific characteristics of the sound as well, chosen by the musician, then musicians and audiences wouldn't care if a piece were played on a Stradivarius or a plastic violin from Toys R Us.  Bass players, guitarist et all wouldn't put all the care they do in to the particular tone and sound they are going for.

Not everyone appreciates or cares about the sound as much as the notes, but musicians do, and it's makes total sense that music lovers could as well.   So, again, it just doesn't follow that if someone describes some appreciate for the sonic aspects of the music they have listened to (whether it's the tone of the instruments, or the tone as pleasingly reproduced on the sound system), that they are therefore as you are trying to claim "NOT MUSIC lovers."

That's absurd.
Look, you have had your own audiophile journey and have come to a set of criteria that please you.  That's great, fine.  Just don't use your own desires to be judgemental about others, naively putting them in another box as not being a music lover.   That is silly, untrue, egotistic and needlessly divisive.

rauliruegas,

""" Good that first of all you are a music lover. """

I'm sorry, I did in fact miss that first sentence.  Glad we are agreed there :)

Yes, it's well known that home stereo reproduction is an illusion.  All sound reproduction is a compromise of one sort or another, so we all pick our own via the criteria that means the most to us. 

I'm glad you have found a goal for your own journey.

@rauliruegas

Dear @prof 1 : """ I tend to prefer closer seating... """
at one two m.? because this is near field I’m talking about.

As I said: your claim is nonsense, and a red herring.

First, yes when I’m playing an instrument - acoustic guitar, drums, piano, sax - I’m rather close to it and know what it sounds like (very rich).

Second, your demand that I bring a sound meter and measure distances when I attend a concert and report back to you is, aside from being truly bizarre, beside the point.

YOU tried to tell me from one post of mine containing some sonic description that I was NOT a music lover. Instead of admitting you can’t know such thing about me, and how rash a judgement that is in any case, you have been trying to double down on it. You do this by implying that my use of "rich and spacious" indicate only audiophile (hence "non-music-related/non-music-lover) concerns.

And for some reason you think that referencing mic placements makes your point. That’s a red herring. (And you are also misleading on that as well; for orchestral recordings, for instance, mics have often been put further than 2M away, and often include distance mics to capture the ambience of the hall that the audience would hear at the concert).


The point is whether appreciating the "richness, scale or spaciousness" of the sound is inconsistent with appreciating the music, and being a music lover. It obviously is not. No matter where microphones may be placed to record a performance, it’s true that the sound I experience from my seats is, to my ears, rich, of grand scale, spacious etc. (And generally speaking, those are the qualities engineers are trying to reproduce, even if artificially, when recording orchestras, to greater or lesser success).

Simply acknowledging those sonic qualities of music, be it a live or reproduced performance,  DOES NOT entail, as you would have it, that one is not a music lover.

Again: Don’t mix up your own journey and own criteria as being THE criteria that separates a "music lover" from a "sound lover." People are different, and much more complex and nuanced than that, and we can enjoy all aspects of listening to music, from the performance, to how it sounds, to noting how it sounds through different components and systems. They are not mutually exclusive.


Sorry, but this tendency among some audiophiles to judge others as "not being in to the MUSIC like I am" is tiresome, and deserves to be shoved back up from whence it was pulled.

edgewear,
Perceptive and well put!