Turntable got absolutely crushed by CD

@moonglum well as the owner of a full Vivaldi stack (itself further tricked up with a boat load of extra gee gaws) I used to think it sounded pretty good -- until I upgraded my speakers (now M3) and pre-amp (now VTL 7.5III) -- I soon discovered that my prior speakers and pre had been adding a very pleasant coloration to CD playback that masked the shortcomings in red-book reproduction to a very agreeable degree (some added bass warmth and colorful splash around the treble largely from my ARC Ref40) -- with this stripped away the weaknesses in digital became clear and at the same token my LP reproduction took a great leap forward -- with the removal of that extra sheen and gloss all of the advantages of analog came out loud and clear (a wholeness of presentation, a seamlessness across all frequencies etc etc)

By the same token SACD now sounds that much better than red-book

What I'm getting at by this is that often times great sounding CD playback is about finding a set off complementary colorations that enhance the weaknesses in the medium -- with these in place CDs can sound really good, but once you get clued in to the extra spices and flavoring you are adding you soon hear them -- LPs on the other hand only keep getting better

It may be that the OPs Esoteric is designed to bring out the best in CD -- I will not weigh in on all the ways his LP playback system may be limited, suffice it to say that LP playback requires painstaking attention to detail in every aspect and any small error can ruin the whole thing

I truly believe the OP did not intend this thread to be inflammatory, true the title could have a little less provocative, but rather they are genuinely dismayed that their analog investment so far is giving a sub par performance to their ears.

Now their has already been plenty of great suggestions as to why this may be and in fact it could be a combination of a lot of reasons, not just one.

I could say that the cart may not be the best match for the arm. Certainly I feel the phono stage is lacking if nothing else in range of loading but likely suffering from old age as well.

What does this mean?

Unfortunately the OP is likely going to have to spend more money to get it right ,but they will know when they do.

First try playing a different album, maybe a pristine cut from an earlier decade, one known for an exemplary performance and see how that stacks up.

Pardon me if I’m wrong, but is this whole discussion based on a test with a sample size of only one (the Sarah Mclachlan album)? If so, then we’ve really gotten ahead of ourselves here. You can’t make a global judgment about digital vs. analog based on a single example, and more importantly you can’t assume that any release made on both CD and vinyl will sound equally good in both media. On the contrary, i have found that contemporary releases that are digitally produced sound better on CD or HD download than they do on vinyl. Radiohead In Rainbows and Beck Morning Phase are two examples I can think of off the top of my head. In both cases I found the vinyl version to be disappointing compared to the digital download. In fact I’ve steered away from new vinyl releases altogether because I think they’re often overpriced and under-beautiful. And I’m someone who thinks that pound for pound (dollar for dollar), analog is still far better than digital when it comes to simple realism in musical reproduction.

For your test to be informative I think you have to do two things:
- use a number of releases and try to get older vinyl that’s well made and recorded. you’ll have to build a sense of the differences after trying a range of CDs and LPs.
- make sure your vinyl set up is a fair match for a highly regarded CD player like the Esoteric X03SE. I see no problem with your VPI record player, but I agree with the comments here that your phono stage (really critical for vinyl!) could be better, and also your test won’t say much until you have the cartridge loading set correctly for the Denon.

Sorry if this sounds like a tirade - it’s only intended as constructive criticism. guess the point is, analog takes a lot more work to get it right. That's one of the many advantages of the digital medium!  

A great Turntable has a very palpable presentation very deep soundstage and a vibrant presentation .that being said 
is you have a top quality Dac , especially a SE model or modified 
using top quality Capacitors and like the Lascala , or lampizader
tube  Dacs can give great Sonics the Esoteric se is a Very goodSS 
unit CD player myself like everything-on a Solid State Harddrive, no moving parts on a seperate dac .look at DCS if you can afford it
surpasses anything out there. I would like to mention Bybee has a 
internal4x 2 purifier  doublesided tape you put one in your digital, 
preamp,amp  incredibly good improvement just put on underthe top cover for under $150 each  makes digital  more analog or warmer and more depth.i was skeptical , No more !!

You are assuming that your CD and LP pressings are equal.  LP Reissues are lots of time inferior to original CD releases.  In any case, you’d be surprised how all over the place the qualities are.  I suggest using a wider range of recordings for comparison.

When you finally get your analog right, there is a satisfaction to be had there that just doesn't come with merely pushing a button. It's an endeavor that is rewarded by the knowledge that with your own hands, and due diligence, you have achieved something that is very worth doing.

You already have a start on a pretty nice vinyl rig. By the way, I find my Zu Denon 103R works best at between 500ohms-1000ohms.

My advice would be to stick with it a bit longer before you give it up. JMHO

Regards,
Dan

Answering your initial question. I am very happy with my Ayon CD35 CD player which has a tubed power supply and and tubed PreAmp. This got me close enough to vinyl on the things that vinyl does well, particularly emotional engagement, and a musical rightness, plus gave me the best of digital - so much so that I gave up my vinyl. The Esoteric, DCS stacks etc. that I heard were exceptionally clean but were missing this engagement for me. I felt that to take vinyl to the same degree of satisfaction would have been a huge investment in time, money and tinkering. Personally for me the case for vinyl was worsened in that most of my hundreds of records were collected starting in college (now I am 68) and were ruined by play on prior equipment, so I would have to start my collection over. Both mediums nowadays have a lot to offer when tuned to your tastes. There are plenty of crappy recordings in both mediums and fortunately many gems as well.

Junk cartridge!! My TT blows away my CD player!!! Not even close.. 

chadsort,

This is to remind you that things sometimes are not what you were told they have to be. The idea of vinyl sounding superior to digital has become something close to religion. You are almost not allowed to say it is not always true.

No matter how we take it, your example emphasizes the fact that digital is way more convenient and user-friendly for people who do not want to chase the sound. You could improve your analog sound by doing all things suggested, rightfully so, by all the posts here. It might move you more and you may find it phenomenal. However, it will take time and money. If it is ever not perfect, you will have many explanations why it is not. You not adjusting it right, capacitors doing something, equipment being mediocre, stylus having 18 extra hours on it, or something along those lines. Conclusion is always "if it does not sound heavenly, something is wrong with your set-up". It is never "well, it is just because that is the way it is with analog". Or you could slip a CD in your player, press "PLAY" and be just fine with not much less bliss.

Having said that, I will put a record on my turntable now. I like it and it is truly inferior to my CD player.

It depends on your taste. If you can't abide wow, which no-one with perfect pitch can, then CD is your best bet.

I don't have perfect pitch, and I don't mind wow. I can't abide the tizzy digital sound, so I listen to analogue.

But first, try a real demo with revealing music recorded on a great analogue rig. The recording that finished digital to my ears was Delibes' Lakme (Joan Sutherland), London OS26201; also available in CD.

And dialling in a cartridge isn't something that most people can do in an afternoon. Even assuming that your tonearm is stable. I took an afternoon a month for a year before I got it right, and I check it periodically. Yeah, it's a bitch.

Islandmandan.

I agree that likely being limited to a max of 100 for loading is killing any chance of that cart shining.
My dl103d, as stated , is best at 1k ohms.

That and not having sampled any really quality vinyl is the root cause here I fear.

"East is East, and West is West! And never the twain shall meet!" - R.Kipling

Sometimes the best that can be said is "we like what we like!"

I setup a lot of tables...including all manner of customer supplied hardware. It's a bit tough to say 'vta is a bit off'. Imho it's really off until it's close...then its only close till its right. And getting it right is not particularly easy. The stock Denon stylus is pretty easy compare to some but still.

Like said before....change loading and experiment with vta.
And yes the Denon is good but not great....

Why did you ever believe analog is superior to digital ?
Apart from some "superhumans" here on this thread who claim they can hear sounds that do not even  exist, there is ABSOLUTELY no technical proof of even a hint that analog is better....

Usually people into digital go cheap with analog and vice versa. Check out Fremer’s comparisons between digital and his analog setup, usually a 5-digit dac vs his $250k analog. Valid comparison?
IMO, you have to spend many times more for a tt setup than a good CD player and dac. For $3000, you won’t get a good sounding tt setup if you include the tt, arm, cartridge, alignment tools, phono preamp, step up transformer, and all the cables. For $3k, you can go with a Music Hall tt, a decent cartridge, a phono preamp, and a couple good pairs of cables and this will sound OK, will it beat a $3k dac, not a chance.
My analog setup costs multiple times the cost of my dac, and playing a good MQA song, still sounds better than vinyl. Vinyl usually sounds as good or better (depending on recording) than redbook, where it starts getting more equal and digital starts sounding better is when playing hires/DSD/MQA songs. Just my opinion.

Well @cakyol, there is the Fourier Theorem, which states that all you have to do is analyze by sine wave. Everything follows from a sine wave analysis.

Consider a sinewave. How many samples per wave are required to push distortion below 5%? When I did the analysis, I came up with 250. All you have to do now is divide sampling rate by 250 to find the highest frequency with adequate distortion figures.

But don’t trust my analysis. Do your own. There are lots of pro and semipro math packages out there. That’s the point of math and science - when someone gives the details of his analysis, it’s out there for disproof, and I would prefer to be corrected than persist in error.

@chadsort,Please don't post such things on this forum.Just kidding. Enjoy your music, whichever way you prefer!

terry9, good analysis... But NOONE can HEAR the difference :-)  Unless you are a super human.  Are you ?

Cakyol.

I am confused.
You mean that you are NOT super human like the rest of us?

😇😇😇

Nope, a mere mortal who can barely hear below 25Hz and above 15k at best

Cakyol:  " But NOONE can HEAR the difference "

An interesting assertion. What is your evidence?

terry9.... Common sense :-)

Quality digital into quality tubes into quality speakers will beat vinyl for sound quality every time. Unless you like clicks and pops, records make their best sound when hitting the bottom of a dumpster or being sold to a hipster.

Mac MCD 301, Mac 275, Klipschorns. 

Based simply on countless auditions, not just myself but scores of people (please note: not audiophiles, PEOPLE) over many years with everything from budget to mega there simply is no way any VPI doesn't trounce any CD.

So let's set that aside and maybe focus on what you really need to develop, which is listening skills.

No offense, but if you had them we wouldn't be here. You would have heard- not seen, heard- that VTA was off, and kept adjusting until it was right on. 

Lesson One: turntables CANNOT be set up and adjusted by eyeballs, rulers, stylus force gauges, or any of that. These merely get you in the ballpark. Perfect LP playback can only be achieved by careful listening, judicious adjustment, and more listening.

Lesson Two: most everything you adjust will affect everything else. Changing tracking force alters SRA, which affects VTA. Tracking force also affects subjective frequency response, which might make you change your opinion on the optimum VTA. Round and round.

Fremer no doubt has superb setup tutorials online. Seek them out and study.

My tip for setting VTA: If the arm is a bit too high (arm tilts down towards the stylus) you will hear note attack emphasized relative to note body. The saxophone reed a bit more prominent than the body. Cymbal tsss more than tinggggg. With VTA too low the body or fundamental of the note will be a bit more pronounced relative to the attack, or plucking, whatever you want to call it.

If that seems hard, wait, it gets better. The difference, when you get really good at it, between high, low and perfect is way, way, WAAAAY too small to see. Its like thousandths of an inch. When I get it right I write it down, right on the record. Its not like you have to do this. Hardly anyone does. It seems like a lot of work. Impossible, if you can't hear the difference. With practice though its easy. Once you understand what it sounds like when VTA is locked in its hard to accept less than perfect. Especially when by then you also know you can tweak it perfect in literally a matter of minutes.

Once you understand. There's your homework.

cakyol, I am apparently. Thanks for pointing that out!!!

Chadsort, sorry to hear of your disappointment. Many good suggestions here: first, live with it a while (an option that costs you nothing); listen to some original, all-analog records (no need for audiophile recordings); re-inspect set-up (including P2S); see if you can borrow a separate phono stage that will allow some adjustment of loading; and do consider trying a cheap alternative cartridge that’s better matched to the arm. (I couldn’t find it in their current website, but at one stage VPI had a page of recommended matches; I seem to recall they endorsed the Ortofon 2m series, none of which are expensive and any one of which you should be able to resell easily)

Finally, something that has not been mentioned so far: there is huge variation in “house sounds” among brands, and you might have had a lucky find with the Esoteric. I now prefer to listen to vinyl records most of the time, but the absolutist “any analog beats any digital” mantra is just silly. I once also had a Classic 1 and ended up selling it  — no flaming others, but the sound just wasn’t for me, and I preferred digital on my AMR. So see if you can listen to some other rigs that offer a different presentation (say, Well Tempered) — you might find something that changes your mind. 

Moonglum, well said. On a good night, meaning a receptive mind coupled with good electricity, analog reproduction can be sublime. 
I'm looking forward to many more nights of being seduced. To me the best indicator of a pleasing audio experience is lack of listening fatigue.
There are variables of course, but ultimately there is a hard measurable. Given the freedom to do so the amount of time one listens without fatigue is a pretty good measure. Analogue takes me away for many hours on end. It's why I'm in the hobby.
I sometimes switch to redbook and immediately think, hey this sounds better, but the fatigue comes along much more quickly. Just my experience.

The 10.5 arm can do justice to all cartridges...That's not your problem.

When it comes to appreciating the apogee of audio reproduction with a fine recording upon the turntable, and the denigration of that moment by those who have never experienced it, this quote comes to mind:
 "Every man takes the limits of their own field of vision for the limits of the world." –Schopenhauer.

chadsort, you've really got the vinyl folks wound up here.  You're lucky we're no longer burning people at the stake for heresy, but I'd lock my doors anyway.

There have been at least two generations of Esoteric players since your X03SE came out and the sound quality of each new generation has improved over the last.

Cakyol, that’s not the way science works. When you make an assertion, you have to back it up. "Common sense" doesn’t cut it.

When you try to change someone’s mind, you should be ready to change your own. To do otherwise is, to my mind, dishonest.

Glad you've found what it took me years to. For some it can take a lifetime or more.

Haha.....crazy statement based on listening to one artist.  I can give you the old dude.opinion that's not technical.  I have plenty of LP's that sound incredible....particularly some Jazz stuff from the 60's and 70's.  And some LP's that sound just horrid.  The same goes for my CD's from the 80's on.  Been buying recorded music since about 1968.  Don't quit one format over the other......they can both be equally great....and equally crappy.  Just use your ears.....

I think these days, great digital can come close to the very best analog. Close, but not at quite the same level. Having heard what I consider to be the best digital, the MSB Select 2DAC with power supplies, and compared it to an excellent vinyl set up, the vinyl still has it beat. Except in one area....ease of use and access to multiple titles via a server.
Vinyl needs to be set up with exactitude and care, plus it needs ongoing maintenance...the software needs to be treated with kid gloves and the hardware needs to be isolated ( a good suspension helps here) along with a very great attention to synergy. Get it all right, ie, resolving cartridge, arm with correct compliance and a simpatico with the table...and a table that has exacting speed control and ultra low noise...and analog will make digital sound exactly that...digital...to my ears. Get it wrong, and the result will be as in the OP.

I almost got discouraged by the effort that it would take to get good vinyl sound. The expert level the budget needed and all the odds that the chain is suboptimal. 

Recently I have heard good a good vinyl rig. The whole vinyl chain was around 25k. It was indeed better that the 12k digital chain it was compared to.  “more flesh to the bone” more chest in the voice”.

But that was only with some great sounding albums. Others where good but not magical but overall there was still more magnitude to the whole sound. Do you reach that level with a lower budget? 

At home and after a few records my digital setup was not disappointing.

I had no direct comparison any more. 

But to know there is more and to know what it takes to get there make it a tough choice. 

In my opinion It can only be solved with peace of mind and acceptance. There will always be something better in CD / DaC and Vinyl. The fact that there is no objective comparison to be made, makes me the judge of all decisions.

For me the decision tonget in to vinyl “again” is though one. This discussion gave me perspective. 

In the mean time listing to music stored on digital formats gives me pleasure and satisfaction. 

Who knows. 

 

I think of the whole digital/analog thing as something of a race. In my own setup, digital will sometimes race ahead, but will fall back again after an improvement on the analog side. And so on.....
IMO, digital can sound extremely good nowadays. And so can analog.

Very good digital and very good analogue have distinctive sounds.  If you grew up being accustomed to one vs. the other, that might determine your preference.  When MP3 had become the the most prominent form of music storage/delivery, a professor did a fairly large study that showed that a large majority of younger listeners actually preferred MP3 processed music over music delivered at full CD resolution; familiarity breeds content(ment).

I agree with Al, and others above, that, if setup is the issue (and not just taste), the most likely culprit is loading.  A sound lacking in treble and having less "air" usually means to much loading (too LOW a value of the resistance in parallel).  I would try the cartridge with no loading or extremely high resistance value such as 47k ohms.  

To me, the reason to have both an analogue and a digital setup has more to do with available content than with one being better than the other.  If you listen to classical music, you pretty much MUST have a digital setup because there is essentially zero new recordings being offered as vinyl records.  Whether it is a difference in digital vs. analogue, deteriorating master tapes or differences in mastering (most likely culprit), reissued music from analogue tapes often sound not nearly as good as the original records (that includes expensive reissued vinyl); if you want the best sound, it is often the original issue.  Some original analogue records were pretty crappy sounding in sound quality and the digital reissues are superior because of better mastering (e.g., 1970's DG classical recordings).  

Finding the enjoyment of good operatics.  

I'll offer my two cents worth here.....
The LP you are using for comparison is highly suspect! Try finding an original pressing or a different selection.
Those 180 gram pressings don't necessarily mean you are getting good quality recording.
Case in point would be Journey's Greatest Hits on 180g vinyl......the source used to press that is clearly a digital copy.....zero soundstage, all is compressed and NOT musical at all!! Total garbage in other words. Proof is in comparing an original pressing of any song on that 180g piece of plastic. The original pressings I have blow that new LP out of the water. 
I'm surprised they can even sell such crap sometimes. 

Why did millions of people chuck their TT's for CD players, and sell their records? It was because CD's and CD players sounded better.

After that fact, people in the "high end" said no, records sound better. They were right, their high end rigs sounded better than CD's and players, but they failed to mention the price.

Now, Michael Fremer, and his evangelistic followers, are claiming that a mid fi analog rig sounds better than CD; "What have they been smoking"?

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 💰💰💰💰

An artist whom I know remastered the back catalog of a life’s work. You can now hear a brushed cymbal out of a dark grey background, a vocal rasp separated from a concurrent hand clap. It’s all very quiet, and delineated. And eerie, as if there is a light blanket over your speakers. Both on 180gr (and CD.) However, just like cutting a wheel to see how it works, the whole is lost in the experiment.
It no longer sounds like musicians playing together. The essential essence is gone.
When I go back to the 70s original, with its comparitive noisy vinyl, the beauty of the music is there. Utterly. Clarity, air, exquisite detail, mesmerizing midband, black backgrounds, and clean bass not layered in murk.
This is endemic through most remasters and almost all new recordings. Give me an original analog recording with vinyl noise any day.
If you’ve never experienced this difference, you cannot understand the love of analog.

@noromance - no doubt. But there are exceptions. The Speakers Corner reissue of Herbie Hancock's Crossings is just spectacular compared to a time capsule original Warner Green label (which is not a shabby pressing by any means). It just sparkles, has more punch. Perhaps due to the kind of music- a sort of collision of hard jazz, Fender Rhodes funk, no vocal parts as I recall.
I do find a lot of "audiophile" reissues to sound more detailed, a little more 'tipped up' but lacking a certain cohesion and organic quality. I suppose that some listeners want to hear more detail. The other issue, obviously, is price and condition of original pressings (assuming the word "original" means something in the context of time and place). In some cases, the records are so expensive, mid-to high three figures or more, that a reissue makes sense. 
I think it is case by case. But, so often I do find that my go-to, particularly from the dawn of stereo til the mid'70s, is often, not always, an early pressing. (Some reissues and remasters from the period are also better sounding than first pressings in my experience, e.g., Led Zep 1, but again, it's case by case for me).
The hard part is buying a bunch of pressings to make the comparisons (costly and time consuming), or relying on others for their anecdotal views-- sometimes, it is a matter of preference, e.g. Heart of Gold, original Lee Hulko cut is just so natural sounding, but some find it congested and it is hard to find a quiet copy. The Chris Bellman recut is easy to source, has more "clarity" but loses a little of that organic quality.

This thread has turned into a Roseanne Rosannadanna skit:

"Dear Chad,
Sorry to hear about your experience with vinyl.  Unfortunately your cartridge sucks, your tonearm sucks, your phono stage is trash, your vinyl sucks, you haven't warmed up your system, you haven't broken in your system, you need to adjust VTA by ear with every record, you haven't turned down your refrigerator, your cat is sitting too close to the turntable, you're a lousy lover and your breath smells.
Sincerely,
Roseanne Rosannadanna"

The best suggestion I've seen is the lack of loading options on the phono stage.  I've used the Zu Denon on a phono stage with variable loading and it is definitely a salt to taste thing.

That said, I once built my analog rig to outshine my digital, and then turned around and did the reverse, so I wouldn't sweat it too much if you prefer your digital setup.  Nothing wrong with good digital either.  Hang in there Chad!

Whoopycat

A little harsh and extreme there but funny in a way.

Yes lots of possible reasons but so far as stated by many members, many times.

1/ likely the phono stage has sucked the life out of the cartridge by its very limited loading options . Beg, borrow or steal a separate phono with multiple loading options to test this theory.

2/ No actual confirmation yet but it does sound like the OP is basing this off just one vinyl/cd comparison. Needs to try a lot more older known excellent pressings to get a more subjective viewpoint.

Have fun!

Whoopycat, you wouldn't know a good sound if it... hang on, only kidding!
Actually totally agree. Records are a drag but I've only been moved to tears by vinyl. Maybe it was all the surface noise!