Volume levels

@bigtwin 

I agree for the most part. Listening at the right level is definitely the best approach. As my system has improved, my ability to hit that level and not be fatigued at all has been one of the greatest achievements I’ve had in this hobby. 

However, sometimes, I have to drop the decibels (for work, for family etc.) and I still enjoy listening. Of course, I can’t wait to have a chance to turn it up another time.

@audphile1 @mahler123 

i hear you!!

I feel the same way, constantly comparing analog to digital.  It’s a no win situation.  But I have a big investment in analog and I’m really fascinated by it.  The problem is, only the best records really are competitive with digital.  Very frustrating and discouraging.  Those old Nonesuch and Turnabout Ristenpart LP’s are wonderful.

I don’t have an XLR connection so I can’t try that suggestion.

+1 @audphile1 

I did the same a few years ago.  I then decided to buy a direct drive turntable, because I had always lusted after one back in the day and it was a bucket list thing.

I’ve limited my lp purchases to vintage lps that were never issued digitally or are not currently available.  I listen to Classical Music exclusively and so most of these are Nonesuch or Vox/Turnabout labels.  One nice benefit of buying digitally unavailable recordings is that I am not tempted to waste time comparing digital vs analog.  I only have about 15 lps at present, as I am not looking to build a big catalog here in what should be my downsizing days.

  The Direct Drive table is great for fixing speed instability, and while it won’t approach digital for absence of background noise, it is awfully quiet.  And I am again enjoying a few favorite artists from my past, such as the pioneering conductor Karl Ristenpart.

  One of the regular posters in the analog forum here criticized me for seeking a “digital sound” in turntables.  To which I replied “Bring it on”.

@rvpiano if you’re using XLR out with your benchmark dac, the gain is adjustable using jumpers inside the dac. I liked mine set to -10db, the 0db was a bit much. And even with 10db attenuation the DAC was louder than my Sutherland 20/20  Hana ML combo. 

As a side nite… sold my analog front end not too long ago. Got tired of constantly comparing analog and digital, listening for differences instead of focusing on the music. Great LPs sounded great though! But it was a constant race between analog and digital with upgrades for both front ends. There was no winning that battle. Decided to focus on digital at least for time being. So far no regrets. 
 

First, the ability to compress volume but not dynamic contrasts is somewhat dependent on one’s audio system. My Von Schweikert VR9 SE mk2 speakers and my higher end equipment in a superior listening room permit me to achieve great dynamic contrasts at various volume settings.

Second, it’s not true, Digital has the capability of superior dynamic contrasts to LPs. This is generally not implemented in pop, rock and often classical CDs/digital recordings/re-mastering. My EAR 912 pre-amp has meters which indicate dynamic contrasts. So often I’m listening to rock or an orchestra and the meters only move up to -15 or -10 db, mostly at -20db. The majority of my jazz CDs move the meters quickly up and down to near -0db. Same with LPs wherein certain labels have great dynamics and others are bland and move very little.  It's not just a matter of compression but also recording techniques.  

Third, I agree that different types of music and recordings should be heard at least at a particular volume setting. I have the ability to listen to music very loud yet still composed and low in distortion (those speakers-wow)!. I can relax with Mozart piano music at relatively low levels yet don’t want to hear the Fireballs or Takeshi Eerauchi and the Bunnys at less than loud volume.

If your system is revealing enough, it should not be necessary to boost volume on analog.

As others have noted, sound compression was a concomitant of digitization, for marketing reasons: it was another way to make digital sound “improved” over analog. On the audio systems that 98% of us have, it does “sound better”.  

+1 @snilf 

Digital has a wider dynamic range than analog.  This was one of the selling points of the format 40 years ago.

  I suspect that the OP is more signal to noise related.  Even the best analog is going to have some noise in the background, due to the contact of the stylus with the record grooves.  Low level instrumental detail, particularly in Classical Music, is harder to hear because of the competition from background noise, therefore requiring a boost in volume.

I always wondered why vinyl seemed quieter than CD's? Great responses from you guys, @cleeds , etc. Back in the day when we had cassette decks in the rig we could just adjust the output to match the CD player or turntable.

Another factor to consider regarding volume is what ohm and sensitivity rating your speakers are. 

It seems that 4 ohm speakers need more volume to sound good than 8 ohm speakers. Lower sensitivity also needs more volume than higher sensitivity.

When I had 8 ohm speakers in my main rig, I was most impressed with the Yamaha A-S3000 integrated amp regarding low volume dynamics. It was absolutely incredible! I was running Infinity RS4b's at the time and the sonics at low volumes really blew me away.

I thought that amp was the last amp I was ever going to buy for my rig. That was three amps ago...

Both Ginger Boi' and Cleo the Petra have left any and all exposed speaker surfaces alone @puptent , much to their benefit and continued regular feedings with canned v. 'common kibble distribution by the kibblebot'....🤷‍♂️🙄

Whatttya gonna do...Really....🤨  Toss 'em out into the Real World?

Can't go there....have lost a few felines over the erras' to that and and the other drawbacks of mere existence....simple souls with basic desires 'n needs....*S*

Like Debussy, sometimes I prefer cats to people....understandable simplicity....;)

hilde45

... IF we are comparing good, non-compressed recordings only, then the advantages of digital over vinyl are substantial ...

If you’re talking about commercial recordings, it is an exceptionally rare commercial release that does not include some compression. That’s one of the reasons that I enjoy making my own recordings and - get ready for this - many benefit from slight amounts of cautious compression. Just ask anyone who has experience with recording.

Regardless, LP contains a potential advantage over CD when it comes to HF frequency response. There's a lot of measured data supporting that, so it's dicey to say digital's advantage over analog is necessarily "substantial." It isn't quite that simple, although let's face it - establishing the value of relative differences is really subjective.

This thread is helping me understand the stakes.

IF we are comparing good, non-compressed recordings only, then the advantages of digital over vinyl are substantial. 

IF we are looking instead at recordings subjected to the "loudness wars and compression" then it may be that one medium or another has the edge.

@cleeds +1 This was demonstrated by John Darko on his YouTube channel. Recently remastered digital versions of an album had far less dynamic range than the original LP.  Yes as others note, in theory, CDs can have a dynamic range of 96 dB, but that is just the "container".  If the album is overly compressed by the record label due to the loudness wars, then that "container" might as well have a dynamic range of about 20 dB. Sad. But that is where we are. 

As Paul McGowan of PS Audio has said, he'd love to get a chance to record an artist like Adele and do it right compared to the crappy way her last album was foisted on us.  It is almost unlistenable. In fact, I gave my copy away. 

What about the music itself and the recording itself  Some music (I'm think classical music and acoustic jazz) has much more black space and dark gray, as it were, than pop in general.  Some recordings (and I'm thinking predominantly pop) squeeze the life out of the music by overusing compression.  This affects the volume required to experience the music properly.

@asvjerry My cat found my in ear assistance devices carelessly left on my desk, so clearly every thing that then happened was my fault. One of the devices must still be on the feline mothership for study (or, it might have been in the cat box...) and the other miraculously appeared on the living room floor months later. Smudge has not laid a paw on any speaker grills, so she can stay.   for now   pending further review

Thank you, @cleeds  for showing me the dynamic range database. Not something I would have stumbled on by myself, it was very interesting... Is there a similar database for compression?  ;)

my mamma said, "volume is as volume does"

*Sigh*

Since one of our 2 felines ’discovered’ that my ear aids was ’available for interest’....and found the earpiece (molded to fit my canal) cracked on the floor and the BTE portion under a table...

Listening ’Left channel Only’ in my personal biological state hasn’t much appeal, limited to phones with the eq +/- matching the Rx.....

Which cat? Interrogation has yielded nil....Demand for feeding or TLC undiminished....’Cat Stew’ not an option....

Oh, well....time for a new pair, anyway.....

Where does my ’phile $’s go?

To my head.... 😒😏

In the morning before my ears have been assaulted with the cacophony of everyday life, I find lower volumes sound great.

+1

Phono stage Sutherland 20/20

Cartridge Clearaudio Virtuoso, soon to be Maestro

If you're at the 40dB gain setting, try 46dB.

Gain only variable by 6dB.

@hilde45 

 Phono stage Sutherland 20/20

Cartridge Clearaudio Virtuoso, soon to be Maestro

hilde45

Thank you for correcting the false information. There is a lot out there. E.g., Paul McGowan: "Live music typically has a dynamic range of 120 dB ... So, thanks again for the correction. If was up to the SVS website and Paul McGowan, I would continue to think that the LP medium has a more restricted dynamic range compared to digital media!

You conflate potential dynamic range with the actual dynamic range of commercially released media. That’s why I provided you with a link to the dynamic range database, which clearly shows that in real life, LPs tend to have greater DR than their digital counterpoints. That’s all part of the Loundess Wars, @hilde45, and it explains in part how an LP can sound so much better than a CD.

My experience is the opposite. I actually have the volume of the phono stage input on my amp offset -3dB to balance the volume a bit when switching to/from my DAC. 

So I'd say it's mostly system depend as @mulveling alluded to, but it also depends on the recording.

Though I listen at louder levels - the few times I’ve found vinyl sounding dull and lacking punch, it could usually be blamed on phono stage and (in particular) its match to your chosen cartridge.

If you’re running an MC cartridge into a budget phono stage, that can sometimes cause this problem. If your signal level hitting the MM stage (after MC stage gain) is too low, it can cause this problem, even if you try to compensate for this downstream (e.g. raising line stage volume). Switching in a good SUT or head-amp (Hagerman Piccolo, even on a budget) can often resolve these issues.

When you have good analog gear that works well together, you will find no need to get into the philosophy of dynamic range and mastering science - it will just sound good. OP - what’s your phono stage and cartridge?

A cursory glance at analogplanet’s .pdf seems to ignore surface noise. What are the best examples (stats) of this floor per dollar spent for repro (TT +) equipment?

25+ years makes it somewhat irrelevant as far as format comparisons.

@cleeds Thank you for correcting the false information. There is a lot out there. E.g., Paul McGowan: "Live music typically has a dynamic range of 120 dB, peaking at about the same loudness of a jet engine (though some concerts have gone even louder). Vinyl records tend to have about 70 dB of dynamic range (16 bit CD's have close to 100dB). This means that in order to fit a song onto a record, you either need to reduce its overall amplitude or compress it (have its peaks brought down to a lower level) to fit within the given range. How much of each was done varied from record to record and defined the art of mastering. But here's the point: mastering vinyl requires compression to fit onto the space."
https://www.psaudio.com/blogs/pauls-posts/when-less-is-more-2

So, thanks again for the correction. If was up to the SVS website and Paul McGowan, I would continue to think that the LP medium has a more restricted dynamic range compared to digital media!

Typically, digital sources have higher output gain than that of a TT/phonostage. So when wired to a preamp, the TT’s lower gain means you need to turn the volume control higher than digital sources.

Not if you can balance levels. I can do it in my phono pre AND my main preamp. Start there before making observations or pundits.

Seven carts from .26 to 4.5 mV all match my DAC’s output.

The dynamic range on vinyl is definitely better than streaming services. Of course McGowan ignores that while trying to sell a "streaming only" network player.

CDs have always been louder and brighter to me and I believe this is common knowledge 

this equals more detail at lower listening levels 

Recently inserted AGD Audion MKIII monoblocs in my system and have found that lower and higher volume levels have become a non-issue since the GanFet conveys more information clearly enough that there is much less distortion in the sound path. In other words, my system is now what I would call truly "audiophile."

I find the same thing. I run my digital end at 25ish and 35ish (preamp volume control) to achieve the same impact (unless it is a compressed album). I always assume this reflected the input voltage from the source… phono stage vs DAC.

hilde45

Vinyl records have a typical dynamic range of around 70 dB, depending on the equipment used to record the audio and cut the record. CDs have a typical dynamic range of 90 to 93 dB ...

That is completely false. It’s actually very rare for an LP to achieve 70 dB dynamic range and a CD with a 90 dB dynamic range would be even rarer.

If you make your own measurements or refer to the dynamic range database, you’ll see that, in practice, an LP frequently has greater DR than its digital counterpart. Again, this is a consequence of the Loudness Wars.

As soon as I read the post I thought...details!  And that's what it's really about in this case it seems.  Which makes sense to me and I'd agree.  Even though the digital version of a piece is based on an analog version, up to a point in time anyway, the digital has more detail.  But this is compared to vinyl.  I wonder how it does when compared to RTR.

LPs often have wider dynamic range than digital sources

???

"Vinyl records have a typical dynamic range of around 70 dB, depending on the equipment used to record the audio and cut the record. CDs have a typical dynamic range of 90 to 93 dB, though 16-bit digital audio has a theoretical dynamic range of 96 dB.Dec 11, 2020"

https://www.svsound.com/blogs/svs/which-sounds-better-vinyl-or-digital-music#:~:text=Vinyl%20records%20have%20a%20typical,dynamic%20range%20of%2096%20dB.

I'll post my view which is contrary to many others and I recognize that and don't want to start an argument.  but I find the need to turn a system up to hear it perform to be a weakness.  I can listen to my system in the 60dB range and it really pops.  It doesn't have a large sweetspot and in the other room you can tell there is a quality system playing but need to go to the sweet spot to enjoy it.  

People come listen to it and turn it up to the volume they are used to listening at and it takes me a while to get them to listen to it at a lower volume but eventually they tend to appreciate it.  But their ears are trained to a higher volume.

As for the original question, I don't have vinyl.  but many digital remasters really sound great compared to the original and perhaps vinyl can't take advantage of that.

Jerry

I am in complete agreement here. The best way to enjoy digital sources is to turn the volume down as low as possible.

I don't experience a need for higher decibels on vinyl than digital. As long as either is played between 70 and 75 db, they sounds equally grand. 

That is an interesting question. I tend to listen to vinyl in the evenings. If I am spinning records then I am really LISTENING. I use digital sources in the morning, while working out, while doing work. I think the effort of records encourages me to pay more attention. I also notice that the same volume with my morning coffee and my evening cocktail are not equal. In the morning before my ears have been assaulted with the cacophony of everyday life, I find lower volumes sound great. Once I arrive home from work at 7pm I listen to the same music louder to get the same satisfaction from the same tracks. I am not sure if ears get fatigued and this is scientific. It may be in my head but it is a reality for me at least.

+1 @bigtwin ​​​​

I know digital output is generally higher than analog.  My point is that AT THE SAME VOLUME LEVEL I hear more detail in digital. And, at least on my analog system I get virtually no external noise, usually as quiet as digital.  
 I do acknowledge however that digital does have the potential for greater dynamic range.

Yes, +1 @bigtwin 

@bigtwin +1
@lowrider57  +1

 

Typically, digital sources have higher output gain than that of a TT/phonostage. So when wired to a preamp, the TT's lower gain means you need to turn the volume control higher than digital sources.

For me, be it LP or CD, listening at low levels has never been enjoyable.  I'm not suggesting LOUD, but every piece of music just pops and comes alive at a certain volume that is not achieved at low volume. IMHO

I don't know what you mean by "dynamic range," but digital media have much more dynamic range, in the usual sense of the word, than vinyl. "Loudness wars" aside (and that means: compression of pop for play in cars, etc.), vinyl not only can't reproduce the dynamic range of the original source (which, these days, is almost always digital), but vinyl is also beset with much higher extraneous noise (pops and clicks, surface noise, etc.). Thus, one must listen to vinyl playback louder than digital because: 1) the signal to noise ratio is far poorer; 2) the noise floor is higher (which is sort of the same thing). 

OR, is your digital stream compressed?

Cleeds,

Yes,, you’re right, dynamic range is a factor.

LPs often have wider dynamic range than digital sources, which seem to be more targeted in the Loudness Wars. So, yes, the tendency is to play the LP a little louder. And that's the whole Loudness War problem in a nutshell.