When and how did you, if at all, realize vinyl is better?

If I want caffeinated vinyl I just go to starbux...

But seriously, I've been building a system for the past few years, piece by piece, trying to understand what "good sound" is, and how the different parts of a system effect the outcome. I've tried to be neutral about tubes vs solid state and analog vs digital. In the end i'm a tinkerer, not an ideologue, so it doesn't really matter to me which side wins out. Or so I like to believe :)

Anyway 4 years later I have a system built around an SET amp (Art Audio Jota) with an analog front end (modded VPI Aries 1) that has just come into its own with the addition of a Doshi Alaap phono stage. On the digital side I have a Baetis server running into a Chord Hugo DAC fed by a fancy Revelation Audio S/PDIF cable. I'd say they're roughly comparable on the audio hierarchy (?), though I've put way more time (and enjoyment) into the analog side (and money!). But the digital side sits largely dormant. The spouse recently looked at it and said "that shelf is for the defunct stuff."

So why does it end up that way? I like the digital well enough, but there's just something very different about it. Like @effischer  I don't know how to define it, and like @dentdog it just happens naturally as I'm listening. I gravitate to the vinyl and focus in; I 'enjoy' the digital while i'm doing other stuff, but it doesn't grab me. High res files help, but only so much. The best I can say is that it's like the difference between the reproduction of a famous painting and the experience of seeing the real thing. They ain't the same.

I think @gregkohanmim may have a point - the analogy in the method of production of the sound (physical object creating vibrations, rather than a software algorithm) may be the key. Yes we humans are very smart, but sometimes we claim victory before we've really got it right. I'm sure digital will some day (maybe soon) eclipse the sound potential of analog playback. But it'll be a good while before a $4 sound file sounds anything like a good $4 used LP! and for me that ends up making a huge difference.

I agree that the premise is a bit funky, even if I prefer analog.  For one thing, "better" depends on what music you're listening to.  If you only listen to contemporary music, I doubt you're better off trying to hear it all in vinyl. No point in adding a layer of distance from the original digital recording. OTOH if you're primarily listening to music recorded before the Reagan administration (ok I admit it) then vinyl makes more sense.  

 The assumption here is that all modern music is digital and all mastered the same. Its not.

@atmasphere great point! thanks

@geoffkait 

"The assumption here is that all modern music is digital and all mastered the same."

Geez, talk about a Strawman argument. I never heard anyone make that assumption.

I made that assumption earlier in this thread. @atmasphere was referring to that post. I'm happy to fess up (I was oversimplifying).  

and +1  @alpha_gt . I think the record wear argument about LPs is overblown.  If it happens, it's simply too slow to have any major effect on my listening habits.  

- @randy-11

if you think that vinyl sounds better, then your system is inadequate and you need a more resolving system with a better DAC

could you give some detailed evidence for that claim?  

here's some evidence for the other side.  My digital set-up consists of a Baetis Revolution II server feeding a Chord Hugo DAC with a 1.2m Revelation Audio Labs Cryo S/PDIF cable. The sound is nowhere near as good as what I get from my analog setup, even with the highest resolution files I can find.  

Now I understand that there are better DACs than the Hugo. And I'm sure I could tweak it here and there to good effect. But I agree with @avanti1960 . I haven't spent more money on the digital side of the system because I just don't believe it will change the sound significantly enough to justify the outlay.  

@jbhiller 

That NAD sounds interesting - I hadn't heard of it.  I like the Hugo a lot (people say it sounds 'analog' lol) but it's a bit high maintenance because of its small size, so one day I'd like to get something more hefty like the NAD.  with modern conveniences like HDMI inputs... 

But on the topic here - I honestly don't care whether people like analog or digital better. To each his own, and if people get a high from going down the rabbit hole of computer audio, more power to 'em. I do think there's an objective "truth" I'm hearing, but I also have to recognize that what sounds good to people is a result of training and culturally informed tastes. I grew up listening to vinyl, and I never liked CDs from the time they first came out. so maybe i like that sound because I'm used to it, and the clicks and pops don't bother me. My friends in their 20's are more 'digital native' and they just seem comfortable with that sound, even though to me it feels compressed and lifeless. who knows... 

But what bugs me - and I see it in this thread - is the assumption that people like analog because of some deficiency, like they're hearing impaired, or out of step with history, or too rich and elitist for their own good. In other words, the argument against analog at some point turns into an ad hominem attack, instead of an actual (factual) debate. Why?  

@tubegroover thanks for your answer, that makes a lot of sense. In hindsight I thought my post was a bit shrill and I even considered deleting it.  But you have it right - it sort of goes with the territory, and the lack of "hearing" in our society can certainly be found on all sides.  

@jsm71 you describe my own thoughts on this well! I’m sure that at the top end of the spectrum there’s a rough parity between vinyl and digital at this point. But there are a number of reasons why I don’t get the "bug" to go after that high end sound in digital format. For one thing, I spend so much time on a computer during the day that messing around with the file structure on my Baetis server when I’d rather be listening to music is really a buzzkill. And as you say, my LPs never stop working because of format changes or digital rights management. The best sounding digital files are at this point gigantic things that cost a lot of money. But a $4 dollar LP can sound just as good. or better. The other thing - and I can’t explain it either - is that LPs hold my attention as if I’m hearing the actual performance, whereas even the best digital reproduction (that I can muster - Hi Res, good DAC, etc) sounds like a very nice image, but just an image. I’m sure there’s a technical way to explain what I’m hearing, but I don’t know what it is…

@atmasphere  - wow that's really interesting and helpful, thanks. 

Actually to be honest, this thread has gotten me thinking again about improving my digital setup. Much as I love the Chord Hugo DAC, it’s not that user-friendly as home stereo component. Too small and travel-oriented. So there’s a lot of music going unlistened-to on my server. Maybe I need me one of them Tabletop Hugos... (he says while looking around to see what he can sell).

And another down side of vinyl: as I improve my analog system over time, I’ve come to realize that much of the vinyl I buy - maybe even a majority - just doesn’t sound that good. Either it’s poor recording or mastering, or it’s an old and trashed record that looked fine in the store. Cheap software is a key part of the equation for me, so this is kind of a PITA.

I will admit that ON AVERAGE digital files may be better than analog, because digital sources eliminate this whole issue.

... Yeah, definitely gonna toss my VPI turntable in the garbage when  the Love comes out. can't wait!   

Consciousness is a privilege or aspect of a complex social/environmental scene, it is not a core requirement for species survival.

Really not sure about that statement. Lots of very old-school assumptions embedded there. I'd say 'consciousness' is a lot older and deeper than just humans, and long a key to "species survival." 

In other news, I appreciate Ralph's point about how the cheapness of digital recording contributed to its dominance. I can remember recording on analog equipment in the 80s, and marveling at the beauty of the playback on a good reel to reel machine (can't remember the make).  I don't recall ever having that feeling with digital recording.  

But on the other hand, one has to recognize that the cheapness and ease of digital recording and reproduction has led to an incredible amount of musical creativity, whether through digital sampling, listeners 'curating' huge collections of diverse music on their hard drives, or the democratization, to a point, of musical recording.  Digital has been detrimental but in the very limited (and elite) value of accurate musical reproduction in the home.