By the way, I disagree with those who think that good digital is less expensive, I think exactly the opposite. You really need extremely expensive equipment to make digital tolerable. With analog - just a few thousand $$$$. If you play your $10k Marantz or Esoteric or Accuphase etc and heard nothing better - you have no idea how digital might sound. Still, it sounds artificial no matter what you do with it, and it always will. By definition. But people are stupid and stubborn and so they will keep trying.
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)
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)
508 responses Add your response
A major problem that's holding back my digital system is that my vinyl significantly out-performs it. I'm trying to figure this out. It may be that it'll never be possible due to the dynamic superiority of vinyl? I went ahead and bought the Music on Vinyl release of Surfacing -- even though there's a Analog Productions release which is assuredly better. My record playing system: Triangle Art Concerto + upgraded platter / Jelco 750 / TA Zeus / TA speed controller / periphery ring and spindle weights. Lite Audio all-tube phono stage + NOS 5751 with Herbie dampening rings...getting a Hashimoto SUT next week. My digital system: Custom PC no fans + linear PSU + battery isolated SSD + battery powered Paul Pang USB card / Win10 / Roon / HQPlayer / Fidelizer Pro. Space Tech Lab DA-512DSD-1 / 274B + KT150. Both systems (except the speed controller) are on a Chinese balanced isolation transformer I got in just this week. Cabling is currently a mish-mash of pro cables, silver-plated copper customs from Amplifier Repair (on eBay) and an Audio Envy I picked up at a show. Power cables are mostly Audio Sensibility. I got the Space Tech Lab a while ago to try and bridge the gap between my records and my digital because it was all-tubed with a big bottle 274B rectifier and no-holds-barred on the output tubes. The dynamics, especially with the all-tube phono stage, of my records are just in a different playing field compared to the digital and the new DAC didn't change that. When the Hashimoto comes in it'll probably take it up another notch. I don't know what to do. If this keeps up I may abandon digital altogether. Do I need an Esoteric to reach the same level? |
Here's the reality - In general and with today's latest DACs / spinners $ for $ digital beats vinyl rigs up to about $15 - $20K. The main reason is - you need many more components for vinyl - TT, cartridge, phono preamp, isolation platform not to mention the mat, record clamp /weight, cleaning machine, on, and on. For digital, you need a DAC and a decent music PC or a stand - alone CD / SACD player. Once over $20K it depends but vinyl starts to take over. |
A Denon cartridge? Why would you do that to your vinyl? You’re kidding me, right? In legal circles, this is called a results based outcome. Sounds to me like you wanted the digital to win, and you put a piece $300 cartridge in there to make sure of it. But I’m just a humble yet unreasonably and thoroughly opinionated know nothing with 51 years of audiophile experience behind me. What do I know? Put a Koetsu or a Van den Hul in there. Even their entry level cartridges. Then write back to us. Please. sbonamo, I disagree in your price point. More like around $15K. And if you are patient and shop around for used equipment in excellent condition, $7K. |
There are many cool things about vinyl. A whole vibe that you simply can't get elsewhere. But if we are talking purely about "sound" quality, the "average" consumer system for CD will crush any average consumer system for vinyl. Vinyl is an archaic and noisy medium, requiring substantial roll-off in the lows and highs in order to get to the final medium (vinyl). Why anyone would do that when the original digital source is available is beyond me (The "Surfacing" album mentioned is a digitally recorded source). Listen to a classical record with a quiet flute part for example - and just the sound of the stylus dragging across a perfectly Mint vinyl record is too loud and audible against the flute itself. I have around 8000 vinyl records, use a VPI Prime sitting on a HRS R3X isolation base with a Cadenza Bronze cartridge - a decent setup. Side by side with the Esoteric K-07x there is no comparison 90% of the time. Doesn't matter if the vinyl is MFSL, or Analogue Productions, etc. I know I won't make any friends saying that, but do the comparisons yourself and see. A high end CD or SACD player will simply crush a decent vinyl set up.... most of the time. There are times this isn't the case (original 60's or 70's vinyl with early 1A stampers or amazing engineering (Van Gelder, etc.). But most of the vinyl today, including audiophile pressings (MFSL, Japan, AP, etc) are simply just EQ moves pushing highs and lows to make it sound better. Do a true comparison, match the volume, strip back those EQ moves, put the CD or SACD on, game over. But there is no "vibe" just dropping a CD into a transport. Bunch of us love getting together, shoot some pool, have a few beers, spinning vinyl, glazing over the gatefold artwork, chatting about this and that. Another whole vibe to vinyl there that is very cool indeed. But sound quality? No. As my one friends said: If you want the best experience, put the record on. Mute the vinyl output. Now put the CD player on and listen to the CD while you watch the vinyl spin. Best of both worlds. : ) |
@unreceivedogma : If the DL103 sounds so bad why has it remained in production since 1962? While many cartridges (both mm and mc) have become extinct! The marketplace sorts out the winners from the losers! How about those old-fashioned Ortofon SPU's? Still in production after 60+ years and still loved by many! Let's see you design and market a better mc cartridge than the 103 for such a low price! |
| Post removed |
That's what you put on turntable - original 50's, 60's and 70's pressings. Also some Japanese first releases from 70's and a few others like original UK Dead Can Dance pressings. Not necessarily A stampers unless your system is very high resolution. If not - forget about vinyl, enjoy digital, save a lot of money and call yourself audiophile. |
Sorry guys, I just don’t think the vinyl is that greater than a good cd. As much as photography, digital has gone far. Of course that old film cameras have a better picture. That doesn’t mean the digital photography is not good. I do think that we can appreciate the difference between a good vinyl and a good cd is on systems above 30 / 40 k USD. You will need at least nice speakers, at least 10k for the pair. Monoblocks for them - another 10k. Another 20k on eletronics. Not saying here cables and other complements. Having all that you will also need a vinyl that was recorded as analog. Nowadays most of the vinyl recording are done digital. The vinyl is a waste of time and money for me, as much as this fancy expensive systems, but I do have one. Moneywise this is a waste a time. Even in my expensive fancy system I don’t see a vinyl in the near future for me. |
You have some serious upgrading to do on analog rig as many people are saying. It's expensive and takes time if you don't have the funds. Upgrade that tone arm and cartridge. Or as soon as you can afford a 3D tonearm and koetsu or Lyra. And I listen to a lot of digital. I don't find it harsh or unmusical. But vinyl has an important part in a system and can be tremendously exciting and moving in a way that digital isn't. I listen to classical on digital because lp surface noise is too much for me. But then I'll put on the lp of the Reiner Kiji or Ansermet Pulcinella and it's jaw dropping time. |
I think the utter pain-in-the-ass requirements of vinyl set-up, maintenance, cost, along with finding source material that is worthy, is EXACTLY why I stayed away from it, and exactly why I'm enjoying this thread. No offense guys, but I'm feeling more than a bit vindicated after putting up with all the vinyl snobs and hipsters that sneered at my unabashedly digital rig while they bragged about their analog one. And laugh out loud kudos to Whoopycat. |
snowdog212 Vinyl is an archaic and noisy medium, requiring substantial roll-off in the lows and highs in order to get to the final medium (vinyl) ...That's mistaken. It sounds like you're confused about the RIAA curve, which does "roll off" the LF while boosting the HF, only to be restored by the inverse curve in the phono preamp. Listen to a classical record with a quiet flute part for example - and just the sound of the stylus dragging across a perfectly Mint vinyl record is too loud and audible against the flute itself.That sounds like something is seriously wrong with either your phono cartridge, your setup, or both. |
Digital is superior to LPs always has been and always will be.I had turntables for many years I don’t like the pop hissing noise crackles that you get from LP’s so I’m sticking with digital which is superior to Lp’s. Turn tables are just hype .A way to make more money. I am 61 years old and have been in to audio for 47 years and started out with LPs and tapes wishing for a format that did not have problems with hissing crackling scratching skipping and eating tapes and many other problems . Now with such great cd players and Dac’s that you can buy today it’s hard to beat digital no matter what the experts Say. .I will not go back to the days when somebody walks in the room and makes the record player skip and scratch a new LP or the tape is ruined by the tape deck. What a waste of money to invest in something that’s going to cost you more and more in the long run to replace your records because they’re scratched and tapes because they are ruined . Been there done that. |
I have already stated my opinion on vinyl vs. digital, in short, they both have their place. Reading through this thread, however, I gather some people either have a strange emotional connection with their media or are using this forum to exercise their contrarian sensibilities. Coolness does not come into play in my world. My friends and family think I'm nuts anyhow. I bought both my wife and daughter Bose bluetooth speakers and they love them (I also pay for a Tidal family service, a really good buy)! I love my family more than anything, so why would I subject them to such crappy audio? Because all they want to do is listen to music. |
"...when somebody walks in the room and makes the record player skip......in the long run to replace your records because they’re scratched......Been there done that."You are so right. I had a deja vu recently while copying some records to digital format. Telling everyone to walk lighter and be careful when closing the door. It was nostalgic, though, although not in the best possible way. And in the end, some records were noisy enough that I bought them again and am redoing it again. No walking, no door closing. Inconvenient for sure. Been there, done that, as you said. |
CD format is garbage. Extract the information off of them and stream to get the best possible sound reproduction. That being said, whether or not the LP version sounds better or worse depends on the particular recording. Most cases LP reproduction is superior. If you have pops and hisses you are not doing it correctly. The OP didn't set himself up for a proper comparison with an unfortunate turntable tonearm-cartridge-phono stage combo. |
| Post removed |
The OP said: "At this point I feel like I should give up on analogue playback and invest further in digital."Smart move, I did that 27 years ago in 1991. Analog is not better musically...but it is an interesting experience for those who still can get by the limitations and are entranced by the visual experience. |
It really is all about the source material and the cartridge when it comes to vinyl. I have a digital front end playing FLAC files from my computer through JRiver then through an Oppo Sonica DAC through Jolida tube separates then to Paradigm Studio 100 V5 speakers. I find digital to sound clean, clear and deep but ultimately sterile. My analog system is a VPI Scout 2 with the 9" arm and a Dynavector 10x5 MC cartridge. The phono section is a Vincent PHO 7. Not high end but nice. The 10x5 compliments the VPI very well. I like to listen to a lot of 1960's produced albums like Doc Severinsen, Miles Davis, Johnny Hartman, etc. And also more recent audiophile recordings from MoFi and Analogue Productions. The latter can get pricey but the sound is great. I recommend you make sure your cartridge is professionally set up and that the impedance matches your phono stage. Then listen to quality analog recordings. There is a depth to the sound and realism that I have yet to hear digitally although I have no experience with high end digital set ups. |
| Post removed |
Not sure what you’re listening to, but 90% of my vintage records are not existing in digital format appart from some private digital copies recorded from the vinyl and uploaded on youtube by collectors in bad quality. Or some horrible CD comps recorded the same way (from vinyl, not from the tapes). You can not replace a good vinyl collection with digital, you have no access to the mastertapes recorded in the ’70s for example, all you can do is a copy from your own vinyl. I have no reason to do that until i can play vinyl! I would do that only to share my selection with somebody. Also i have no idea how a physical object like original vinyl poress with cover can be replaced by digital file or CD from the modern era? CD format died in the ’90s, tell youth people about CDs - they never ever tried them! You can also remember MD or DAT tapes - another dead media formats. "Collection" on Hard Drive - you must be kidding? Remember when you lost a Hard Drive with all information on it, it happens with computer hard drive. This is a typical scenario with evything digital. And all those scratched CDs! What a waste of time with the worst media formats ever made. Vinyl is the only media survived in this crazy world of digital crap. This is the only musical format that motivate youth generation to buy it as an art object (even if they don’t have a turntable to play it). The only format you can trust is vinyl and analog audio equipment, digital crap has no value at all. Vinyl and analog gear is an investement, the real things that only rise up in price in time. People who blame vinyl have no taste. Digital is only a tool to discover some nice music to buy on vinyl. Collection of music must be on physical format, not in the cloud. It’s like an art, you want an origina paining if you’re serious about it, not a digital copy on the screen. I so sorry for the people who lost an enthuiasm with age. Playin vinyl is a pure joy! |
“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? 😳 |
| Post removed |
Not a very fair fight IMO. Better cart and phono stage + proper setup will make all the difference. Not saying CDs don’t sound good, don’t want to go down that fat hole but I would not expect a CD to “crush” a quality vinyl recording played on a properly setup turntable with quality components (cart and phono stage). |
@chrisoshea, With this 'logic' one should probably not buy used records either. One never known how it has been handled, how often it was played and with what stylus, does one? Glad it isn't my logic, or else I wouldn't have any records....... It has been said before, but bears repeating: what cartridges do you think those vintage records from the '50's and'60's were played with? We are debating on this forum whether sapphire is an acceptable cantilever material, but back in the day most people used a sapphire stylus! When the sound deteriorated it was worn and you simply flipped the stylus over to wear out the opposite one........ Yet most of these records have survived such crude devices, except in obvious cases of mishandling which are easy enough to see. The best of these are still considered the benchmark for sonic quality and many of them are worth more to collectors than the MC cartridges discussed here. So why should you be so 'sensitive' about the condition of previously owned modern cartridges with a sophisticated diamond stylus? |
@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. |
@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. |
"Remember when you lost a Hard Drive with all information on it, it happens with computer hard drive." 4 TB hard drive can be had for $99 at times. They are simple to copy as a back up and can be stored in different locations for safe-keeping. Different houses, towns, continents. It does get a bit tedious to populate all those back-up drives with new music as it takes as much time as cleaning the record but there is something called "cloud storage" these days, too. Used, but "very good+" condition of 2014 Sgt. Pepper's mono record can be had for a bit over $100, if you are lucky, and more likely $150. In the most-space consuming digital formats, that hard drive can fit hundreds of Sgt. Peppers'. I may be the only one out there who has ever lost a record, but I am looking for two single records that I had somehow misplaced/lost. I bought new ones now and am, to prevent further loss, putting them on hard drives. So, I do remember when I lost a record but have not lost a hard drive yet. PS: All the examples above are from my own experience. Hard drive, Sgt. Pepper's, houses, towns, and continents. No cloud yet, though. |
"Vinyl and analog gear is an investment, the real things that only rise up in price in time." Not so fast... https://www.audiogon.com/listings/lis97c3b-technics-sl-7-linear-tracking-turntable-turntables https://www.gramophone.co.uk/editorial/review-technics-sl-7-turntable. http://www.in2013dollars.com/1981-GBP-in-2018?amount=200 "In other words, £200 in 1981 is equivalent in purchasing power to £744.59 in 2018, a difference of £544.59 over 37 years" |
I stream digital all the time in my car and I LOVE it This is what digital is made for, i do stream news in digital format on iphone when i’m cooking. But when i want to play an album LP or a single "12 from my favorite band, i want to play original vinyl in analog system not as background music, but as a serious listening session. Since my favorite music was recorded way before digital was born, i want to play the original source, not a bad digital copy. Digital copy can not be better than the original source such as tape or vinyl. It’s a copy. Only if the original source of modern music is digital then it make sense to use digital. Even vinyl pressed from a digital is just a "digital on vinyl", not the analog. But i know a lot of bands who’s still recordings on master tape in 2018. An average age of the band members is 20-40 years. They want to record on mastertape and press vinyl, that’s what they do. I appreciate it, this is a cultural thing, vinyl never die! Vinyl gives people more that just a music. If the music is just a background then you don't need a vinyl. Not everyone who's buyin records is a record collector. Kids loves records too, watch this 12 years old kid interview by M.Fremer on AnalogPlanet |
