I have to ask this(actually, I thought I mentioned this in another thread.). It's been at least 25 years of digital. The equivalent in vinyl is 1975. I am currently listening to a pre-1975 album. It conveys the soul of music. Although digital may be more detailed, and even gives more detail than analog does(in a way), when will it convey the soul of music. This has escaped digital, as far as I can tell.
Its only been going on for 2 and a half years and hundreds of posts. You'd think with all the collective brainpower thrown at it that the winner would be clear by now. The resolution (no pun intended) must be close at hand.
Then we can talk about tubes versus SS a bit also.....
Very late to this thread....but my experience is with my tube DAC.....soul or something is present. No brightness edge.....just rich highly transparent involving tunes. With my XM radio.....they play vinyl....so who needs records.
On a serious note, I have read where HDTV created a serious problem for Hollywood in that it was increasingly difficult for otherwise attractive stars to look good in high definition.
The solution: more makeup (analog, not digital make-up I believe).
This is obvious these days on TV to most anyone.
I suppose this is the video equivalent of digital remastering in audio.
I want to point out that if it weren't for digital, many advancements in audio would have taken much longer to arrive at, or may not have arrived at all. I'm thinking of power line distortion, power cords(?), line-stages of preamps, speakers, etc.
Had to revisit this classic thread to announce that it has happened.
I've done some tweaks to my system since last visiting this thread which succeeded in getting me thinking and I believe my system has now achieved the lofty goal lamented in the subject of this thread.
I my case, it took adding tube DAC and switching to an ARC tube pre-amp to do it but I think my digital now got "soul".
Or at least the music that plays on it that should have soul seems to have it spades now.
What other spiritual traits should I be checking my digital for now?
Tbg, I suppose "soul" is, when there is no trace of listener's fatigue and when the music really gets under your skin AND you forget about your system and nothing but music is left. And yes, finally, says the old vinyl man, digital has come a long way indeed. Especially if you listen to it the way you suggest!!
I think todays decent CD player are very good; however, they'll all only sound like "real music" when they have adaquate AC conditioning and isolation.
I think what is being called "soul" (or musicality) has much to do in fact with PRaT. With vinyl/analog you have a proper sense of "timing". A kind of "timing" that allows you to relax between the notes. It sounds strange but this is what (above all else) gives reproduced sound "musicality". It is not the ability to reveal micro information burried in the music or to deliver abundant macro dynamics. It is the way of reproducing sound without any stress and with the right "flow". With some digital gear you have the feeling of "uneasyness" that can be very tiring. I think many of you have experienced the feeling of relaxation that immediately appears after you've switched source from CD --> vinyl during a listening sesseion.
Chris, Basically I am complete agreement. Digital however has improved in the last decade and these days you can set up a system, I would say in the way Pscanli has suggested above, which will give you the same micro and macro dynamics as vinyl/analogue would, *IF* you stick to voices and small groups, string quartets, Jazz-combos etc. I still cannot bear digital with big symphonic music. There is still too much missing, which a good analog/vinyl rig will give us plenty of.
Hey guys, how can you make such broad statements about the effect of format choices, like digital v vinyl. IMHO you can tune your system to enhance either format so there is NO fatigue. It only gets tough when you try to tune your system to enhance both. In my experience anyway - I've always had a hard time optimally tuning for more than one source, let alone different formats. But its fun trying! :-)
"I've always had a hard time optimally tuning for more than one source, let alone different formats. But its fun trying!"
That is exactly what I try to do with my system, ie tune each source to sound as similar as possible using a variety of reference recordings in each format.
My results currently are still not perfect, but very good nonetheless, and the best I've had on my systems ever by a good margin.
Common noise factors associated with imperfect vinyl is typically the only way I can really tell for sure whehter digital or vinyl is playing. Otherwise it is hard to tell from recording to recording. If I do not hear any background noise, it is hard to tell. That makes me very happy!
Newbee, Mapman, sorry to -in a sense- to disagree with both of you. If you are crazy enough to try and drive both formats to the limit of what is possibly today, not even in terms of money, but that also, however certainly in terms of tweaking, you will find that both formats have advantages over one another. Old vinyl still reigns supreme in terms of classic orchestra, digital in other fields. None is "better", both are different and you can count yourself lucky, if you can get the best of both worlds. Wished you could come over to the Alps so I could show you what I mean.
As a second thought, to get both formats right in one and the same system is a hellish task. I've tried it for years. You can get somewhere, yes, and learn a lot along the way, but you will never know what both formats are really capable of unless you treat both sources as complete separate entities with entirely different tweaks and AC-management. In my system the preamp is happy with both, as well as the amps and the speakers.
" but you will never know what both formats are really capable of unless you treat both sources as complete separate entities with entirely different tweaks"
Guidocorona makes an extremely salient argument for the re-orientation of most audiophiles. In the end, whatever brings one closer to the music is the right technology:O)
Detlof, agree that it is hellish task to get both formats right in same system. I did though using same same make preamp and phono. Same (but different than the electronics) make TT, Tone arm and cartridge. Then I changed the bearing in my TT to Magnetic and my old cartridge died and I got another of same cartridge, practically new and sound changed in certain freq range. From midbass to low mids it is hard to tell difference- I constantly mistake one for the other, Highs are now extended and a bass a bit tighter in my TT set up. I use same make cabling and power conditioning all around to minimize unknowns.
With all that said, In my system the digital has 'slightly' more soul. It is not perfect, (but nothing is) but next to the real thing. May be when my new cartridge gets broken in, things will be different. I doubt it though.
It would all sound so much better if our ears were analog! What a shame that all mechanical hair movement in the cochlea is converted to nerve impulses in order to be sent to the brain (i.e. an analog to digital conversion, with individual nerves either firing or not).
"What a shame that all mechanical hair movement in the cochlea is converted to nerve impulses in order to be sent to the brain (i.e. an analog to digital conversion, with individual nerves either firing or not)."
It is very high resolution digital in there at least. Thank you God!
They show this in the IMAX film about the human body...a must see for any audiophile!
Yea, but you guys forget, that ye olde braine converts it back to analog as the music hits our emotions or are you guys tickled by electric impulses???? (;
This old argument of analog vs digital is getting more and more far fetched as time passes. . . unfortunately our neurophysiology in its richness and complexity transcends the trite definitions of 'analog' and 'digital'. . . I just hope no one starts invoking pop quantum mechanics as the next obvious facile mantra that just explains-it-all'. G.
One would even argue that CRT-TV is better than HDTV (it has to - it's analog). It's not "edgy" or "bright" but has this pleasant softness and fuzziness....
"to soften the look of HDTV program content" - yes, because some actors asked for it. Whatever they do result is incredible. Both, analog and OTA HDTV occupy the same 6.5MHz bandwidth but you cannot even compare picture quality.
I think many people are in "digital denial" and HDTV/Analog is a great example.
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.
