Analog and digital never actually were into any competition - at least not in terms of sonic performance. If one looks on the 3 decades of digital audio in evolution and its predictable future as flash memory and download as source, it is and always was no-demand-for-knowledge-and-convenience vs difficult- setup-and-fragile-performance-peak (burden with high demand on attention to detail and minute care).
Will you ever compare a Toyota Prius with a Mercedes 300 SLR ?
If you do, certainly not regarding pure driver's pleasure or peak performance on deserted highways. |
Well, when some time ago I compared two systems, one consisting of a junk Pioneer turntable with no-name cartridge plugged in Yamaha receiver and another consisting of a very good CEC belt drive player and Audiolab integrated, the conclusion was obvious right away - analog was much better in the most important aspect - realism.
So, now I only buy CDs if I cannot get it on vinyl provided that the recording and mastering was analog. I have a few LPs where the recording was analog but mastering digital. They still sound a little better than CD but are actually quite close to CD. |
PEt,
I can't argue with your assessment. A vendor's goal is usually to make the best impression possible with the things that they want to sell you. Nothing wrong with that. Except that the comparison can sometimes be to other things that they are not selling and it is hard to know sometimes when an apples/apples comparison occurs. |
Mapman,
I can't answer that question or presume to know what motivates the vendors. I may be under the mistaken impression that vendors want visitors to leave with the best impression possible, regardless of source type.
The thread asks when do the two compete. They competed pretty clearly at RMAF. I personally preferred the analog systems in each case. However, I did not hear top SACD or files against top LPs for a comparison of the absolute best. I do think good analog is more expensive. |
Petrayer,
I wonder how many vendors were out there with both vinyl and digital where teh message they communicate is that the digital is as good as or better than the vinyl?
I find high end vendors that demo both are usually biased towards the vinyl and the systems are configured to demonstrate the superiority of vinyl becasue that is where they stand to make more money selling to audiophiles. There is just not much market for expensive CD players these days but there will always be a niche for high priced legacy vinyl. |
I was just at RMAF and heard about thirty systems, half of which had both digital and analog sources. Though I never heard the same music in the same system in both formats, I can say that each time the vendor played both sources, I preferred the analog. And the difference was noticeable in both the weaker and stronger systems. The high rez files sounded closer than standard CDs.
The Walker and Dobbins tables were part of two very good sounding systems. |
I started out in audio selling Quad, Kef and Levinson in the 1970's, and have been in and out of it as a hobby since. I own several hundred cds and about the same number of lps. IMHO, if you want an analog front end that sounds as good or better than cds, do the following:
1. Spend $400 or so on a well maintained, used AR XA turntable and mid range Grado cartridge.
2. Plug it in.
3. Sit back and enjoy. |
When it's not a cigar yes, if you're looking to enhance your analog!!! |
|
Drink when you listen to digital!!!
Smoke when you listen to analog!!!!
That should balance out the two for ya!!!! |
The tremendous influence of the seemingly microsignificant on turntable performance continues to astound and repel me. Jferreir, no factor of analog is trivial IMO. |
Cajun P, best college football game I have ever been to:
Auburn vs Alabama in the mid '90's. Great fans, great stadium, great rivalry, great sporting event. Very tough tickets to get, too. |
Macdadtexas,
It looks like the 2012 M5 will be approaching that sub 4 second mark!
BTW..although I am born and bred New Orleans, my Alma Mater is in a town 300 miles northeast of here named Tuscaloosa. You folks in Texas may be a little familiar with it. I can't, therefore, in good faith agree with your kind gesture of "Geaux Tigers".
Roll Tide Roll,
Pepe |
After you finished 2 bottles of Barolo! |
In regard to isolation. A turntable is the most sensitive component in the whole system.
When people say that isolation should be addressed last, it is because they probably don't have a turntable.
If your room sits on a concrete slab then that helps alot. If it has a suspended floor then a wall shelf would most likely work better. |
Jferreir,
As to isolation being a final tweak or a basic setup issue, it depends on your environment. It is not only speaker noise which matters. Buildings have resonance. Some of it is earthbound, some of it is how buildings react to outside elements. Some of it is how buildings turn noise in one place into vibration in other places. Part of it depends on where you live. If you live in the countryside on the eastern seaboard, far from roads, you may have little worry. If you live in a city, or in a region affected by earthquakes, you will find that buildings tend to resonate slightly most of the time. It is kind of creepy.
As for online resources, check the FAQs on Audioasylum.com, Also, if you find conflicting information on these resources, raise the question about which should be trusted on Audiogon or over at Audioasylum. How does a newbie become an expert? Practice. |
Judging by the volume of responses, I was correct is my estimation that this might be a touchy subject...
It was interesting reading everyone's responses. Thank you to those who have contributed. Just to reiterate, I presently have NO intention of swapping out any components or experimenting with any 'tweaks' until I move the system to a more hospitable listening environment (just a few months away). I know without a doubt that my biggest obstacle is the room - reflective walls and speaker placement, being the most troublesome. Alas, that is beyond my control. Life happens.
That said, I'm always a bit skeptical when I read about the importance of isolation platforms. The speaker stands are spiked and, when playing a low volumes, there is very little vibration (if any) that would travel up the desk. Besides, in a tiny listening environment of 10x11, I would think airborne vibrations would be a greater problem. In which case, wouldn't the isolation platform be obsolete? I was told that isolation platforms, contrary to what some here have written, are a final tweak. It is only when everything else has been properly executed that one can hear the difference proper isolation makes. Thoughts?
I know experience is paramount to achieving optimal analog playback, but it's a bit difficult when you have no one to instruct you on proper procedure/maintenance. How would someone new to the hobby become an 'expert', so to speak? I invested quite a bit in my current rig, so I don't feel comfortable letting my clumsy fingers manhandle the thing. I've tried hunting around garage sales for an old TT to practice on, but no luck so far. Are there any (free) online resources that may be of use? Given all the conflicting information out there, it's difficult to siphon the truth from the BS. I kind of wish I could enrol in a course or something... just so I know the instructor is knowledgeable. I really hate relying on local dealers for simple things such as mounting a cartridge. |
My first reaction to this thread was to look at what the turntable was sitting on. So, I guess I agree with Samhar and T_bone. While this might not solve the specific problem, until this is looked at, you will always have a problem. |
For anyone who is serious about getting the "high end sound" on the cheap, there is a well documented thread here on the Gon; that details the Rega upgrade path. |
I was listening to some very electric CD tracks by The Cars yesterday.
Did not hear a trace of soul there but it was most intense and musically gratifying nonetheless.
Had some remastered James Brown playing also the other day. Lots of soul there fer sure! Same true for Mahalia Jackson (Ellington's Black Brown and Beige) as well! |
Some people can hear, some can not. Some will appreciate the "Soul" of the music, others have no idea what the "Soul" of the music is. Just as only "connoisseur's" of great wines can appreciate vintage grapes, so it is with "high end" audio. As snobbish as this sounds, it is a fact.
I can hear Theron_day's rig. That "groovetracer reference subplatter" definitely puts it over the top. His rig captures the "soul" of the music. If you can hear, "run with the big dogs", if you can not; stay at home. |
LOL... OK, I'm dead(for now); but learn how to read anyway. |
BANG, your gone Phaelon!! We're always packin' in South Texas, that was a bad call on your part.
2 out of 3? |
"Digital better than all but a $35k vinyl rig?"
I didn't say that Tex. Draw! |
To paraphrase the great Mike Myers (as the crazy Scotsman shop owner on Saturday Night Live), "If it's not analog it's CRAP!!!"
There I said, it. Digital better than all but a $35k vinyl rig?
Hahahahahahah, that's good. |
The best front end I've heard is a $35,000 turntable (with arm and cartridge) that was installed and tweaked over several visits by the TT distributor. So, I guess analog wins, for now. That said, until I heard this particular TT, while I could hear what people liked about analog, I considered the whole thing personal choice, similar to the SS/Tube debate, with digital coming out on top most of the time, IMO. |
My Dual 1264 with vintage Goldring cart playing through a vintage Yamaha receiver in my second system is worth way less than $1000 but darn if it does not put out some most enjoyable sounds these days! I've had the Dual and Goldring for a good 20+ years or so now but it sounds the best ever on the Yamaha that I picked up only a couple years back for only $65 used on ebay. |
Michael Fremer himself a man who is a huge proponent of quality analogue playback states that one can get great analogue playback by even buying a good new starter table for around $350 with included cartridge.
Add a decent phono preamp and you get excellent. Maybe step up for a few $$$ more a better cartridge and you're set on your way in this hobby for a few $$$. How does it compare to quality digital sound? Who knows? It's all subjective. But IMO my most enjoyable playback experiences come from good vinyl discs playing back on my system. |
I will agree with Audiofeil (I must be coming down with something - this is at least the second time this year) that spending $1000 on a used setup can get you a goosebump-inducing sound (though as others have said, it takes more to get all the way). Unlike the other parts of most people's source components, there is a significant physical aspect to turntables. That includes support. I will agree with Samhar's comments above, certainly in your system (turntable on top of 'wood' desk on hardwood floor), I would be fearful of environmental noise getting into the turntable. The first thing I would do in your case is get a suspension/isolation system which reduced the resonant frequency of environmental noise. This could be magnetic suspension, or something similar (Yamamoto makes little magnetic repulsion footers, I think Clearaudio may too, Sony used to; a Relaxa platform works too). I expect that would improve your result somewhat, and perhaps somewhat dramatically.
I will have to let others comment on your table/arm, cartridge, and phono stage as I don't know them. The table you have has a very small footprint, and if maintaining that footprint is important to you, the things you have to work with are probably suspension, cart, and phono (as I don't know if the arm is replaceable).
Dougdeacon's point about a $125 MM cart being wonderful BECAUSE the other two parts of the system (table/arm and phono stage) are up to snuff is key. One can say there are three parts to the system (and there are sometimes more, depending on how you set yours up) and if any one of them is not up to it, the whole will be dragged down to the level of that one. Personally, I find the cheapest ways to improve an existing setup are usually, in order of improvement/cost ratio, is 1) suspension/isolation, 2) a good protractor and good setup, and 3) a better phono stage. Oops, forgot to mention periodic use of Magic Eraser to clean the stylus (thanks Doug!).
I have one analog system in place where I "cheat" on the phono stage because it is in a preamp, but used the table, a cheap-ish vintage MM cart, plus half of the phono/pre cost me less than $1000. That said, it cost me a lot more money and time and learning to be able to put that together, and considerable luck on the used market (used, the table+arm+cart would be more than that on Audiogon if you could find them, and the preamp was not sold in large numbers and is relatively unknown, but an absolute gem in any case). Nevertheless, that system, even if it cost $2k, would be sufficient to get one very far in vinyl. |
Define High End Sound?
One can't, it's all subjective and based on too many variables. Those who spend a lot of money buying what they deem as high end sound talk as they do to justify the purchase, to others why? If spending mega bucks makes you happy then so be it. If you spend food money, medical expenses money, mortgage/rent money doing so then you are an idiot.
There is no true definition of high end sound and price paid does not guarantee this stuff sounding good to great. It's all subjective. Put a $100,000 TT with $50,000 preamp and $50,000 power amp driving $100,000 speakers in a lousy room and it will sound lousy. Put a $10,000 system in a well thought out and properly furnished room and it may sound great even dare I say high end.
Too many so called golden ears (NOT!) audiophiles like to deride other person's gear without even hearing it. Silly I say.
The discussion is in my point of view, can one get quality analogue sound without spending mega bucks? YES! in a subjective world with all its variables one can get great analogue sound if they put it togethe with good assembly of gear even modestly priced gear. There is no reason to try to compare what analogue gear to what digital gear. Invest well your discretionary money to building one or both to sound good to you.
The height of arrogance combined with ignorance is often spoken by those who say they are audiophiles and want to impress others with mega buck systems. To that I say just enjoy your gear, you do not need to justify it to any of us, nor do you need to try and run down more modestly priced gear. You have no clue as to how good even a modest system using competent gear may sound without hearing said system in a room.
In this hobby you spend money on a system, it can be digital and/or analogue, a lot of $$$ or fewer $$$ and in the end if you are a hobbyist you will try to build a system that makes you happy be you spending a lot of $$$ or fewer $$$. THAT IS ALL THAT MATTERS! |
>>07-27-10: Orpheus10
Jferrier, the reason I posted on this thread is because I become incensed when beginners are led to believe they can get the "Analog" sound that everyone raves about for less than 2K<<
They can get it for around $1K as I indicated in a previous post. There are many other combinations as well.
As a beginner yourself, it will be clearer with more experience.
Good luck to you. |
Jferrier, the reason I posted on this thread is because I become incensed when beginners are led to believe they can get the "Analog" sound that everyone raves about for less than 2K. If you get a "Midfi" table and you identify the sound as "Hi end", that's fine. However, when you discover the "Hi end" sound, you will realize you wasted your money. |
>>07-26-10: Orpheus10
You are getting off the subject children. ANALOG is the topic<<
WE are?
May I remind you of this?
>>07-26-10: Orpheus10
I am comparing my bonified class "A" digital to analog. It was not until I had spent 2K, not counting cartridge, that I had 3D sound that exceeded the digital.<<
You brought digital into the discussion.
Wake up Homer.
Duh |
You are getting off the subject children. ANALOG is the topic. |
Bill,
If it has been bonified, it must be good. |
What is Class A digital?
Is a nebulous term that surely differs from person to person. Your Class A is my Class C.
And please don't give me that Stereophile Class A sh** definition.
That's a product of audio lobbyists.
IMO |
theron_day, after reading what you got, I know what it sounds like, and that is what I'm talking about. |
audiofeil, there is much ambiguity in all statements regarding this. I am comparing my bonified class "A" digital to analog. It was not until I had spent 2K, not counting cartridge, that I had 3D sound that exceeded the digital. I accomplished this through numerous tweeks including changing the tonearm wire. Total cost was 2K. |
>>07-26-10: Orpheus10
2K is the bottom line for analog to compete with digital<<
Disagree.
A pre-owned Music Hall MMF-7 and a pre-owned Graham Slee Era Gold Mark V will cost about $1000 for the pair.
The combo will startle even the most dubious.
IMO
I have no financial interest in either product. |
2K is the bottom line for analog to compete with digital. While there are many ways to get there; you will end up spending 2K or more. |
Young people stand and just stare at my ancient rig with it's Christmas tree lights and spastic analog meters. "You mean all that sound comes out of THAT"? All '70's stuff, Pio. SX-1980, Tech. SP-15 TT/EPA-250 TA, SP-25/Infinity Black Widow backup TT. After a brief flirt with mo-dern MC carts., a venerable Grace F9-E and a $45.00 NOS Acutex cartridge are now favorites. $3500, cost of a new car then or currently obtainable for the equivilent of the same old "beater" now. Experienced others laugh about the antique gear until they listen, for 30 years my musically induced smile has been the Chesshire Cat-like same. A modest Rega Saturn CDP gathers dust, digital is for the ride where on a twisty road I don't really care if my music is reconstructed in teeny little irritating bits.
If cost is your concern, I suggest you'll find good value in vintage equipment.
Peace. |
my 10 and 8 yr old are both good to un-que the record, move the arm to the rest, remove the periphery ring, flip the record, clean the record, and place the cartridge on the first track of the record, missing the periphery ring.
Daddy is so proud!!
Both girls by the way, I agree with Nrenter, trust them more. |
The simple answer is: every day!
Every link in the analog chain keeps getting better.
With a good analog rig, you just want to keep playing music.
|
Dear Nrenter,
How sweet to have children to share your life with. They are the music of life.
Sincerely, |
Digital is superior for 1 reason: Remote The lack of remote allows me to focus on the music currently playing, rather than thinking about which track to jump to next. However, if I could train my 5-year-old to flip sides, brush the record, clean the stylus, and queue up the first track, I'd be on to something. I'd trust her over my 8-year-old son (but probably be the logical choice to train, as he'd be sitting next to me, listening). |
Darn sorry to hear that. I apologize that my pathetic $60 Empire cartridge and my tubed phono pre-amp kicks sand in the face of ANY cd I've ever heard. Perhaps I just don't understand the concept of the silhouette cutouts that cd offers that I've listened to for thirty years. It doesn't take a lot of energy or expense to have vinyl sound like music, only an open mind.
Sincerely, |
It took me getting a Rega P5 / Michell Techno weight / Groovetracer Reference Subplatter / 2mm spacer / Dynavector 20XL / Rogue Stealth Phono Pre to finally get to where I was happy with vinyl when comparing to CD's. They do sound different and a lot comes down to the source signal. I would say about $2-$3K before it started competing with the sound of CDs.
2 cents.
Theron |
My apologies for not reading ALL the responses, (lots of them!), but I started back into vinyl with a budget table, cart, and phonostage, thinking that would do just to get a chance to hear more music relatively cheaply. It didn't quite work out that way. I just wasn't satisfied with the fit and finish if the budget table, or the sound for that matter.
Now, $6190 and four years later, my analog finally outdoes digital by a wide margin, on the right recording. I tried to go against my audiophile nature, and settle for less than I normally would in the analog format.
I bought most of my gear (including the Dyna XX2MKII cart with almost no hours on it) used, in great shape here on Audiogon or the figure quoted above would be at least a third higher.
What was I thinking? I'm glad I did it, it suits my hands-on approach to audio. If I had it to do over, I would still do it, but I would learn how to extract the best out of any given group of components before deciding to move onward (and upward in price). If you don't really know how to set up your arm/cartidge, you have no idea how good, or bad, what you have is. It's taken me years to learn the intricacies and variables of set up, and some timely help and advice from such as Dave Garrettson and Doug Deacon, but I finally made it. The knowledge is the most valuable part of the whole system, as without it, you just keep wondering why it doesn't sound as good as you thought it should. But with determination, (it also helps a great deal if you enjoy the process), success can be achieved.
As Elizabeth said, they are different, but analog can and does sound better, when things are optimized (I think there is just more THERE there with analog). I love both formats, but really get a bit more out of analog.
Dan |
Jferreir,
I suggest you move the left speaker out of the corner and both speakers away from refractive edges of the desk. It will cost you nothing and will make a huge improvement in imaging and sound. |
there are TTs in the market for under 300 Dollars which are better than any CD player without good/expensive DAC. But this is not an attempt to convice you buying this 300 Dollar item... |
