Turntable got absolutely crushed by CD

I've found that a turntable is the only thing that will play my vinyl collection...you can't cram them into a CD player slot...really nothing else works. 

Judging by the majority of replies on this thread there seems to be overwhelming concensus that analogue can still hold its own and more often than not surpasses digital in the reproduction of recorded music. However as one post suggests, therein lies a complex challenge of making sure that each of the many components involved in the analogue chain are well set up and working together. The best option you have been in the digital habit and wish to try analogue is to get one of the better quality packages that include the fully set up record player. Most reviews consider even these starter level systems to be better than any digital player.

To begin with, put your Esoteric player aside, forget about it. It is clear that your analog rig does not sound as good as it can and should. It should sound very very good. Make it happen. After that you might want to compare using original pressing record or in some cases Japanese first release pressing from seventies and best cd issue of the same album you can find, usually Japanese audiophile.
Many right things have already been said.
Yes, tape rules, just not cassette. To date I have never heard "stunning" digital recording. Or analog for that matter. My analog rig is better than my cd player so my comparison is there is no comparison, no use to you.

Prof, that’s pretty much my story — I now have vinyl playback that provides tone and clarity.

More importantly, your comments are consistently measured and constructive — kudos. I just wish you would plunk for the Devores, that’s all ;)

Mike Sanders (Quicksilver) makes an excellent SUT. I have one (among several others in my collection)!

MC cartridges are high-current/low-voltage devices. The best way to change that low-voltage to a level sufficient to drive a phono stage (while keeping noise low) is with a transformer (inherently lower noise floor than an active stage). And keep the IC from the SUT to preamp as short as possible. Use a ground wire from your tonearm to the SUT and another ground wire (any length) from SUT to the preamp.  

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.

Hi,
be patient with your record player and you will be rewarded. Normally a new player takes some time to get used to, then adjust it properly and there it is. Analogue takes time.
It will jump out, you will notice the difference when you are nearly there, till you get the correct spot.
The better cartridge will just complete the picture.

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!

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!

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!

@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.

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.

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 💰💰💰💰

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"?

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. 

Finding the enjoyment of good operatics.  

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).  

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.

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 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.

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.....

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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. 

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

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.

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. 

terry9.... Common sense :-)

Cakyol:  " But NOONE can HEAR the difference "

An interesting assertion. What is your evidence?

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

Cakyol.

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

😇😇😇

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

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

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.

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.

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....

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....

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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