Vinyl / Digital / and can you have too much information.
I am copying this from a thread of digital vs. analog spending, but thought it may be an interesting --- Discussion ---, not to pick which is better, but to have a conversation about an aspect of why some may prefer vinyl. FIRST - A bit of an example to set the "mood"
A CD is 1411 bkps to achieve 44100 samples/second at 16 bits and 2 channels. What
if we had an uncompressed signal at 128kbps? ... That would allow us to
do say 2 channels, 10 bits, 6400 samples/sec or 3.2KHz. We could do 8
bits, at get up to 4KHz. Not too terribly impressive huh?
How do
you think 8 bits at 8ksps would sound compared to a 128kbps MP3 or AAC?
It would sound awful by comparison even though technically both have the
same amount of information. Why does the MP3 sound better for
the same raw information? Because the MP3 concentrates the information
into areas in which the brain can make use of it.
Let's consider vinyl: Perhaps due to
dynamic compression during the mixing/mastering process, other
intentional choices made during mixing and mastering, even what we
consider limitations during playback, we are maximizing the audio
information that the brain can take in. Perhaps that inherent
"filtering" that a turntable does maximizes the useful audio information
that the brain can take in my minimizing extraneous information that
can cause information overload. I am more of a digital guy, but even I
feel this happens at times.
That information limit will be
different for different people. That could even explain why some love
vinyl, and some, not so much. I think it could also speak to the
listening fatigue that some claim to experience when listening to
digital. It is simply information overload, especially when coupled with
"loudness wars" information levels which could be considered extreme.
I can certainly make arguments against this:
Why are high end DACs" then
viewed as being closer to vinyl? A counter is who is making
those statements and why is their brain telling them that? Why do
some of those DACs measure so poorly? Are those DACs even being "voiced"
Why do non-OS R2R DACs sounds
better (only to some). A counter is perhaps the high frequency artifacts that
modulate into the audio band mask additional information allowing the
brain to concentrate on what it most wants to hear?
Why do many then claim that analog tapes are the ultimate? A counter is, again, some claim that. I can also find many people that claim that digital sounds much closer to what the real instruments they hear, play and record sound like. 1/4" tape formats have "information limits" as well.
There is no right and wrong answer and this is not a topic of which is better, it is about understanding perception.
Listen to the 45 rpm reissue of Dean Martin's "Dream With Dean," and the question will be answered.
Right. But then you're a listener. People who listen always prefer music to noise. Certainly in my experience they do. The people who ask these kinds of questions on the other hand, they like to pretend to want an answer but really they have no intention of ever truly considering any answer that doesn't fit their preconceived notions of what the answer should be.
Usually, and this case is no exception, the question is even phrased in such a way as to tip us off. "Can you have too much information" what does that even mean? It only gets worse from there.
Like, "we are maximizing the audio information that the brain can take in" yeah, right. Offered without any shred of evidence as if its some unassailable fact.
Reality check atdavid, the standard is not what we can measure its us human beings who do the measuring. None of this even exists without us human beings. Without us there is no music, no music at all. Without us its all atoms and photons, pressure waves and vacuums, frequencies and amplitudes.
This is the silliness of digital. Thinking you can cut a rose up into lots of little bits and its still a rose. Dream on.
I will simply put your reply down to not understanding my post; not understanding that "perhaps" means I was not stating a fact; not understanding that even that rose is made up of pieces; not understanding that every time you play a record, the SNR of the playback chain means it is slightly different every time, hence a digital version can be every bit as complete and accurate; not understanding that a record, by virtue of its limitations in signal to noise, channel separation, dynamic range, etc., is a significant "filter"; or not understanding all the ways even at the cutting stage that the analog signal can be distorted.
A reality check Millercarbon, would have you realize that Everything about my post was about us human beings doing the measuring.
You’re certainly not getting all of the information that’s on CDs. The reason is because of scattered laser light interference, mechanical vibration of electronics and the vibration and flutter of the CD itself whilst spinning. There are other reasons, too, but those three are a good place to start.
I don't use CDs, and any music I listen to that came from CDs are bit perfect extractions as can be proven from the error codes, or more specifically the lack of them when the ripping process was done. That would be 1, 2 and 3 strikes .... you're out.
As per usual you conveniently side-stepped by comments. That’s called a logical fallacy, remember? Bit perfect? Yeah, right! Lots of laughs! That’s exactly how CDs have always been marketed, Perfect Sound Forever! Hooray for Reed Solomon Codes!! Two old timers who did the best they couid under the circumstances, I suppose.
1) Streaming online then eliminates all your arguments.2) Two old guys who know infinitely more about error correction codes than you, a bunch of guys who know far more about optics, and sensing created a system, that has 25% of the data for error correction, so that the vast majority of the errors on a disk that is only partially scratched, can be eliminated.3) CD ripper software can run slow, do multiple passes, etc. 4) I can take a wave file, burn it to a writeable CD, then read it back and do bit comparisons.5) You are shilling a product. Where is the independent proof. This is not a matter of listening, this is pure data integrity.
I tend to agree with the original poster. I think quite often it’s not that things are more optimized for human listening, but are more easily reproduced by all the electronics and physical interactions involved. A tweeter capable of producing frequencies well above human hearing will reproduce those frequencies while also trying to reproduce the frequencies that are audible to us. Is this desirable? Wouldnt the tweeter perform more accurately more efficiently if it were only reproducing the frequencies that we can hear? A lot of nasty things can present themselves as high frequencies in digital formats. Even sending frequencies below the capabilities of your woofer is changing the accuracy and efficiency of the woofer. Why do we have a rumble filter for vinyl.
There is also the fact that the mastering that occurs to make something appropriate for vinyl does but much tighter controls on frequency response, in a sense making the presentation more stable and consistent.
Honestly, tape is the most enjoyable playback medium that I have found. And it seems like there is a lot of information there... I have a feeling eventually we are going to find out that there is more artifacting in digital reproduction than we currently realize, much of it happening at the time of digitization.
millercarbon: as an objective outsider reading this thread with no preconceived notions, I think your input is unnecessarily dismissive, without saying much of substance or proving anything. Your last two paragraphs make no sense at all. Seriously.
A good solid state DAC has a signal to noise ratio of about 120db. A good tube phono stage has a SNR of about 90db. Similar ratios exist when you compare solid state amps to tube amps. Yet lots of people swear by tubes and vinyl.
Short answer to the OP is could be yes. I think like the human brain craves beauty through the ears just like it does through the eyeballs. Does higher SNR or lower distortion equal better sound? Are better sound and beautiful sound the same thing? If I locked you in a 10x10 concrete room with Miles Davis, how long would you be able to listen before you were pounding at the door wanting to get out? You would be hearing Miles with 100% accuracy and no distortion, and yet it probably would not be pleasing to hear.
Streaming is not a done deal as I understand it. Isn’t uncorrected CD on a decent uncorrected CD player still better? If not, at what point will CD be better than streaming? After CD treatment? After isolating the player? After treating the player? Or is this a case of me not understanding? 😳
A record has the analog waveform pressed into its tracks. It is analog and with good equipment can produce overtones up into the 100s of thousand hertz. Its the missing overtones that make digital a bit barren. You can't hear them, but their lack of influence on the frequencies you can hear, is audible. Good digital played right from an SSD, or even better a RAM Disk, can be magical as well. It needs a big word and high sample rate though, as it is samples, not an analog waveform, so we need all the information we can get. DSD in its way, produces a crap ton of samples as well, and its the large number of samples that make digital really good. We won't get the overtones but we can have more detail.
Really a good DAC can produce most of what we need from a Red Book CD, and some of those are quite wonderful as well. One must keep in mind that production values have a great deal to do with this as well.
That argument does not fly. Most vinyl in the last several decades is cut from digital. Prior to that analog tape whose frequency response dropped like a brick much past 20khz as did the cutting head/amp.
Well if they are much older, then it is an even worse problem as old tape machines had seriously limited top-ends, as did the cutting machines, etc. etc.
Mine were mostly bought from the late 40s to the 80s range. I don't doubt you are right but lack of overtones is one of a host of problems sound assembled from samples has.
I have not that many records left, gave most of them to my son when he manifested an interest and I was not really in a position to play them well. Now I have a modest record capacity and regret giving them away.
My Digital setup is much nicer than what I had before and I am getting great results from it, playing files from an NVMe SSD. They are even nicer from a RAM Disk but that;s another can of wriggly things.
My system consists of the following: ANALOG- Pro-Ject 2Experiance turntable with a Sumiko Blue Point #2 cartridge, Pro-Ject Phono Box S and the Pro-Ject Speed Box S (about $1700) to a Sherbourn PT-7030 Analog input. DIGITAL- Bluesound Vault 2 (optical out) to Oppo 105 (digital in) Balanced Outputs to the Sherbourn Balanced inputs. (about $1800 for a Music Direct demo Vault and new Oppo). All run through an Emotiva UPA-700 power amp to AV123 Strata Mini front speakers (I probably need more power to my front speakers). I have a couple of albums/CD's, where I own the album (some new in great condition, some 30 to 40 years old still in pretty good condition) and the cd burned to my Vault music server as well as a HD downloaded to the Vault. I have had friends come over and ask about the turntable and how it sounds. Before I got the Oppo the turntable just blew away my digital setup, once I added the Oppo the demo became a lot closer. It was really close with the HD downloads. But no one has EVER thought the digital system sounded better than the analog system. Most can’t really but into words what exactly the difference is it just sounds better. All that being said it’s hard to beat the connivence of using the digital system. Hit the Bluesound icon on the harmony remote and about 60 seconds later you’re up and running. BUT when I just want to listen to GREAT sounding music I default to the analog system.
Give a listen to modern MSB R2R dacs and you might find that digital can sound natural and real; Sure surprised me. The engineers designed these dacs with a laser focus on technical accuracy (ie measures superbly) and the sonic results that follow are stunning; purely neutral, natural, and plainly real sounds. Percussion rings true...on and on. Go have a listen!
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
