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.
mr g, you make a lot of statements but you provide no evidence for them. just because you are a composer, that doesn't excuse you from being prepared to backup your position.
You make a good point and I mostly agree with what you said. I think the "soul" of the music results from a good collaboration or synergy between the composer and the artist. And if the recording engineer and the technology he employs can preserve this "soul," and the playback system can pass it with a minimum of distortion and alteration then the "soul" of the music is finally communicated to the music system listener.
Plato, I was thinking about it, and I believe we may have forgotton one very important class of factors. . . that is the cultural macro and micro environments for all the stages listed before. Which may perhaps explain why the classical music of Southern Laos, of Tibet, of the Sarmatic Tuvan region, and of relatively nearby Croatia do not have much emotional impact on me. On these I would have personally to add much of popular music from both sides of the Atlantic pond.
D_Edwards, thank you very much for your input. I believe that people(including myself) need to re-read what you just said. Guidocorona, you have very good points. I have to mention that I believe that you need to have analog(pre-1982) to enter this debate.
"I have to mention that I believe that you need to have analog(pre-1982) to enter this debate."
I have 2500+ records, I'd have 7,500 but I gave or threw 5000 away a few years back. I have setup over 200 analog systems and have owned excellent analog rigs. (SOTA, Star Saphire, Saphire, Cosmos, VPI HW-19IV, ET2, SME, Premiere, Wheaton, Grado, Micro Benz, Monster, Sumiko, Clear Audio, Roksan, EAR, Audio Research, Audible Illusions, Mod Squad, Motif Linn, Van den hul, Ortofon, Technics.
I know exactly what you're talking about, and so do I. So does Harvard University School of Medicine and Bell Labs.
I still don't know what speakers you are using. Very important. As important as my ownership of analog from pre-1982.
Hopefully my resume measures up, to qualify me for this continuing debate.
+ of course many of them are from before 1982. And all of my Cd's are from after 1983. :)
PS: On the Cd transport comment, on a whole there were more choices for High End transports a missing nuance to my comment and the basis. Why is there no serious competition for the VRDS? This is a problem don't you think? Thanks for the correction
Don't bother paul, MRT is just unleashing a bunch of mechanical froggies in the audiopond. He just enjoys the spectacle of the audiocarps frantically chasing after all those useless toys. (Chuckles!)
I'm kind of limited on my speakers. I have to get decent off-axis response for my roommate. I have the original DCM Time-Windows. Finances are tight right now, but any suggestions are welcome. D-edwards, I don't understand why you would get rid of music. Analog(pre-1982 albums), even if lacking complete accuracy will get you off on music. There is no question in my mind about that. I understand that it takes tweaking, and people were not forthcoming in the tweaks necessary. You have to take each parameter of a turntable set-up and listen until you hear what it does. You use the objective parameters as a guideline. I am actually a horn-guy as far as speakers go. But boy, the off-axis response, unless you are rich, is terrible. I have to tell you guys this. Alex of APL Hi-Fi(who is modifying my Denon 3910 cd player) played a cd recorded from turntables, and his recording from a Gyrodec(with his AC Power for the motor and his homemade phono preamp) killed a Rockport with Van der Zeal(?, $12,000)preamp.
"I don't understand why you would get rid of music."
2500 records + 6-700Cd's in a growing collection is like 5-6 years of continuous listening 24/7 Its just being practical especially when most of the music I gave or threw away I had little or no real interest in playing especially since records are of secondary quality on my system.
from my perspective it was the practical thing to do.
If you think about it all of LP's shortcomings, poor channel seperation, noise issues, bandwidth issues, need for compression and equalization all are exact opposites of what CD performance is. The lack of channel seperation plays right into only having two front speakers even if its recorded onto Cd! Because a 24bit Cd has waaaaaay more resolution than some tired record and the CD is capable of an excellent copy of the LP, try to do it the other way around! There are obstacles like the level of technical knowledge in the average audiophile. Many audiophles have a great deal of experience but have framed this into a religious frame work not a technical framework. So facts and trends are obscured by pet theories and fashionable trends not facts.
In your case your time windows have a slight raggedness in the lower treble (which I'm sure you can hear time to time on records) because the tweeter is asked to do a little much. With a CD this can be considerably worse due to the nature of the source. Hardly the "sound" of a CD. I have a $1200 pair of speakers that do not have this problem, so it is not necessarily a cost issue, it is a design issue.
The fact is many many speakers are not "digital ready" even though that was a laughable phrase for most when it was a marketing phrase in the 80's. Harsh high and lack of control on transients play into making CD less musical. Tubes and LP's blur the edges making it easier for equipment to track.
The soul of the music is incrementally easier to reach the less "noise" your system makes and the "louder" you can play the music without room acoustics and equipment deficiencies creeping in to interfere. There has been studies on this... It is science that allows us to repeat the conditions, which is why audiophile companies don't want you to know the truth about it.
D_edwards, you have very interesting ideas. I'm not sure that I can test them out as far as surround sound is concerned(finances, etc.). I do believe that many who read this could comment on it though. I do want to mention something though. It is the relaxation quotient of music. I am absolutely positive that analog has this(pre-1982 lp's). Why do we listen to music? Surely, relaxation is part of it. How well does digital do this? I'm not entirely sure myself, as Alex of APL Hi-Fi has made cd's from turntables that sound no different than the vinyl that it was recorded from.
D_edwards, you have very interesting ideas. I'm not sure that I can test them out as far as surround sound is concerned(finances, etc.). I do believe that many who read this could comment on it though. I do want to mention something though. It is the relaxation quotient of music. I am absolutely positive that analog has this(pre-1982 lp's). Why do we listen to music? Surely, relaxation is part of it. How well does digital do this? I'm not entirely sure myself, as Alex of APL Hi-Fi has made cd's from turntables that sound no different than the vinyl that it was recorded from. As far as scientific studies goes, have you heard about muscle-testing digital, and how it makes you weaker(just to mention studies)?
Well take all my comments as a collective up to now Dynamic range, surround sound etc. They all contribute.
LP's have technical problems that make them somewhat problematic for surround BUT even they could be enhanced by surround. Atleast the companies who spent all that money developing quadraphonic thought so.
But what DPLII does is remove the nasty edge off the CD which for anyone is an irritant. This glare is the reverberant field that is collapsed on the subject/ stimulus of the reverberent sound, whether it is artifical or captured by mics. Two channel cannot properly release this energy which will cause tension.
On the very same system if I switch from surround to two channel a definite edge and glare present themselves. (I have found tubes make this worse(probably not universally though))on CD players, as most tubes are added to soften the sound, but instead they emphasize the problem by adding more noise to the signal and simply blunting the glare.
"It is the relaxation quotient of music." If the music is meant to be relaxing then yes you should be relaxed. One cannot stretch out and relax to The Crystal Method's Vegas unless one is allowed to become detached from the music. Maybe relaxation and the ability to detach oneself from the recorded performance is what you really mean. Surround will not allow detachment as well as two channel. A tweeter that is a bit gritty is like a stick snapping in the woods you will react to this on a base level.
Where I can find a direct conflict with digital not performing as you describe is the people who produce recordings that are DESIGNED too have a "relaxation quotient" seem ambiguous to the medium it is replayed on and if its digital or not. Its just an observation from googling so I can understand your position better. The obvious touche' would be they don't recommend listening in surround either. :)
"muscle-testing digital" I googled it, but if you can point the most relevant study. It would be helpful. Lot's of things on prostates.
I engage music actively it is why I use very accurate flat response loudspeakers. If "enjoy" is too "relax" and "escape" then ultimately CD+surround does this for me. We are all different, so are physiologies could be at odds. BUT! what is not at odds is the surperiority of surround playing back digital.
Are you a bit of a tinkerer or are your speakers bi-wire capable? We can try an expiriment
Yes, according to a recent study by M. Borzatta and Aloysius Q. Schmaltzenstein Gavronsky, published in the last preprint of Lancet&Dunset, runaway digital jitter can in fact produced significant swelling of the prostate through the formation of pre-cancerous nodules. As the study was based on a very small sample, the team headed by the above researchers is now planning to expand it, and is seeking more volunteers in the audiophile community of the state of California.
You would think that there would be more runaway jitter in a carstereo head unit than an audiophile system. Plus the head unit :(, is closer to the affected area.
My Cdplayer is kept at a safe distance if you know what I mean. :)
There is likely to be more raw jitter in a car stereo. On the other hand this is also likely to be cancelled by the extremely poor S/N ratio in the car. Furthermore, being the jitter signal in question in the acoustic domain, rather than in the RF domain, placement of the CD's electronics in close proximity to one's gonads is not expected to exacerbate the situation.
Having just checked my references, it is at this point unclear if the mutagenic gonadotropic effect of runaway digital jitter is at all limited to the acoustic domain, or if instead it is generated in the RF domain, and what its effective range may be. IT is interesting to note that, if a vinyl disk were produced from an early digital recording which exhibited runaway digital jitter caused by problems in the recording or mastering equipment, playback of such disk on a purely analog rig would be as deleterious to the listener's integrity as listening to its CD counterpart.
Digital is going to get the soul of music the minute you stop analyzing the sound and looking for flaws, and just relax enjoy your favorite artist with a glass of your favorite wine.
I have to mention here(God forbid) the "Absolute Sound" has two things in its last issue dealing with surround sound(I'm sure this is not the correct term.). One has to do with not auditioning a backlog of cd's. The other had to do with an Outlaw equipment review. I think both relate to what D_edwards has been talking about. I do want to say that Valen is great addition to the "Absolute Sound", in my opinion. Admit it, Guidocorona, you've had some training in the medical field, as I found your terminology to be correct.
You may have a transport problem. I use my Genesis digital lens to ferret out transports with clock problems.
I'm waiting for an affordable PC based tester so I can save results and take my laptop to test systems away from home.
Now if you're talking about the sustain of an electric guitar or decay of say the plucked strings (unplugged).
Surround can help here but I don't want drivel on about something unrelated. So you can describe "too fast" a little more succinctly based on what i've said above.
Which track of which recording, maybe I have it here.
Mak, are you experiencing the timing problem on every track of every CD, or on just one track of 1 CD? If the effect has a physical origin, you should be able to reproduce it no matter what track of which CD you are playing. The test is very simple: clock any track on a stopwatch. If the final reading is significantly shorter than what's reported on the CD jacket, you may have a transport problem, otherwise the problem is entirely psychosomatic.
The system I heard the too-fast guitar was Alex's of APL Hi-Fi. It was 2 channel. The Eric Clapton cd was maybe made in 1988(or later). I think I only heard one other cd that had what I call digital artifacts(which may not be digital artifacts at all). It was still very listenable. The guitar seemed to suprise me more than anything. Maybe if I had listened to it more than once, my perception would change? Anyhow, I brought it up because in "Absolute Sound" a reviewer mentioned that things that bothered him on two-channel were not a problem on(what I call) surround sound. What about a slight delay making the guitar sound too fast on 2-channel, but making sense on surround?
What I'm thinking(and I haven't followed digital stuff), is the Dolby stuff that made 5.1's(and I'm not sure that they did), did some kind of delay in the surround situation. If that would be true, it would not sound correct on two channel, but would on surround. Since I don't currently have my cd player(APL Hi-Fi's Denon 3910), I can't give you more specific info. Sorry. I also need to expand my digital library. I'm a little hesitant here. I know that analog(pre-1982) has value. Can you say the same about digital? Although, I've been given some great advice on cd, here and elsewhere, I find myself spending my funds on things that I believe I shouldn't just to keep my credibility. My cd collection and access to cd is a disgrace! I'm now a subsciber to "Absolute Sound" and "Stereophile"(boy, they cost so little!), and it was the last "Absolute Sound". I will try to narrow it down to you, but you have to admit that they are reading this topic.
Mak, let me say it bluntly, pre 1982 digital is TERRIBLE, unless it is absolutely awful. If you are fixated on recordings prior to that year you should stick to analog vinyl and worry no longer. life's too short for fussing about trivia!
I recall a study by RCA Labs in the nacent days of "HIFI" (late 40s, early 50s) in which they found that listeners preferred a mellow sound, and expecially disliked extended high frequenices. Nevertheless, Capitol Records released a boxed series of their Full Dimensional Sound (FDS) LPs which included a booklet about the new technology, and names like Fisher and McIntosh began appearing on shelves of specialty shops.
Except for those boxed sets and the old Westminister Lab recordings, I've given away all my LPs, and never regretted it. I must admit, the apparatus of a turntable and arm do make nice toys, and you can tweek them forever instead of listening to boring music.
"I recall a study by RCA Labs in the nacent days of "HIFI" (late 40s, early 50s) in which they found that listeners preferred a mellow sound, and expecially disliked extended high frequenices."
Just more ignored information from so long ago.
and why people still listen to analog despite your personal transition.
Guidocorona, you make a valid point. I believe there is much more variability in digital(I'm sensitive to the point where parts of my body tense-up with certain digital stuff-obviously this is not something we should associate with music!). For instance, my friend bought two cd's recently-Led Zepplen 4 and a Beck album. The Led Zepplin cd made me want to listen to the analog album(My cd player is being updated.). The Beck album tensed my upper left side of my body. Is this what I should associate with music? That's the part I don't get.
Mak, I would drop digital all together and stick to analog if I were you. Tension in left upper part of body may be an early sign of cardiac muscle distress.
Wow! I just got back my APL Hi-Fi Denon 3910. I can't believe it. I've only listened to Led Zepplin's, "Houses of the Holy", which I'm not too familiar with, and Neil Young's, "Decade". Let me tell you, I couldn't tell "Decade" from my analog set-up(which is no slouch-Linn, Ekos, nude Archiv, Lingo, and Mana Sound Table). I actually went to my turntable three times while listening to "Decade". Once, when I went to the bathroom, to see where on the record the needle was. I also went to take the arm off the record when the cd was done. I understand that a lot of cd has to do with recording quality. My current understanding is that analog to digital is good, and that later cd's are much better recorded. But, who wouldn't like analog sound with a remote?
I don't know how Alex of APL Hi-Fi did it(he doesn't even have an active turntable-although that will be changing soon.). But for you analog lovers, I believe his APL Hi-Fi Denon 3910, will do the trick. I'm not sure why. Let me give you a little background. He modified my APL Denon 3910. While I was waiting, I upgraded my Nuforce 8.02b's to 8.5's(this mostly had to do with a power cord upgrade, and maybe their footers.). I dialed in anti-skate on my analog(see Mana Acoustics, Hi-Fi Room, "How to tune the Mana Sound Table by Ear".). While I was waiting for the upgrade to my cd player, I raised my signal cables(per Mapleshade). I also separated my signal cords from my cords. I slightly changed my speakers distance from their back-wall. All I can say is that I've only listened to his player since I got it on Sunday. I will investigate further, but I believe analog lovers need to investigate his APL Denon 3910! I will be investigating this further, and provide further info on my set-up. I have dialed in my anti-skate for the tracking force that I'm using. The end result is that I feel I need to fine-tune my analog to be competitive to this cd player.
I don't think that I can take seriously anyone that doesn't have an analog system. What we need here is people that have both(analog and digital). An analog system consists of a belt-driven turntable(Rega, Music Hall, Project, etc.). In addition, it has records produced from 1981 or earlier, or the super-expensive recent releases. If you want details on this, e-mail me. I wouldn't discount a cd system. For one, bass is better to dial-in speaker placement. Just don't ask me to take seriously people who lack a turntable. I say this due to the relaxation quotient of analog. It is positively there with the recordings that I mention(I believe Joseph Valin tried to describe this in other terms-I will simplify it for you.). What we need here is realistic people. Cut the B.S. I have both cd and analog. Try me!
Sure Mak, I understand your requirements. And as I do no longer own an analog rig, nor will I own one in the future, all I can say is: no problem, No need to try to take me seriously. And quoting that pearl of modern epistemology, Douglas Adams's Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, I shall bid thee farewell, and thussly leaving say to thee: "So long, and thanks for all the fish!"
>>I don't think that I can take seriously anyone that doesn't have an analog system<<
Wow! That's an awful bold statement. I have a number of friends and customers with all digital, absolutely killer systems, who know high end audio quite well.
I think the problem is that analog provides the baseline(1981 or earlier recordings, unless you want to spend $30 per album). Let me put it this way, both (or maybe three) of my designers have bought or brought back their analog systems. Guidocorona, you need a benchmark, and this is it. Let me say what happened tonight. I played the Beatles "White Album", comparing digital to analog, without an SPL meter. Originally, the analog was much more relaxing, but lacked detail compared to cd(Boy, they are very comparable!). My friend made me play the analog, instead of comparing both, but when I lowered the volume on the digital, I couldn't make up my mind. I repeat, the APL Hi-Fi Denon 3910 cd player is for analog lovers. Alex says that it was compared to analog. For those that don't know Alex, he is straight-up! He tells me 200 hours. This was from the get-go. Still, you need a reference(My reference cost $10,000 in 1992.). I need input from people who have both. I'm sorry, Guidocorona. Cd's vary too much. I've gotten much information on this site about cd's, but let's join reality. There is much more variation on cd than on analog(My recommendation on 1981 or earlier albums is pretty valid.).
You will need to let it break in for 200 hours; it will be even more unbelievable. I can not reveal what exactly is done in your Denon because it’s confidential, but I believe it is in the league with the best all-solid-state digital units on the market today, cost no object. It was indeed developed with pure analog in mind. It was “voiced” and finalized using A-B test with vinyl.
Here is a summary of the mods in your player (this is something that can be revealed):
Linear Power supply for the DSP (Digital Signal Processing). Low jitter APL Hi-Fi Master Clock Various extensive power supply upgrades. Bypassed certain Digital Processors for pure signal path. Paralleled DACs. Re-designed filter stage. Single ended Class “A” MOSFET output buffer.
This is being compared to $10,000 analog(circa 1992). Just don't tell me that your memories of analog are equivalent to actual listening. Come on! Let's get something going here. Let's get it right!
Mmaksahk, Does APL Denon 3910 do over or upsampling or is it straight-up 16/44.1? Sorry I am not familiar with this model. Is it Denon CD player and modified or is it APL brand using Denon transport mechanism. What does DSP do? Is there any Alex's web site I can go to?
I do agree with Vinyl being standard for comparision. Even with my limited experience of less than one year w/analog.
I really like your moniker, Nilthepill! Is it based on what I think it is? Anyhow, if you read my thread and responses, I really am an analog fan. I don't know about oversamling. You are asking the wrong person about DSP. Maybe someone can help you here? I know Alex mentioned something about it when I went to get my cd player from him. Alex's website is called APL Hi-Fi(I'm computer dumb.). Your question about whether it is just the Denon transport mechanism is unanswerable by me, due to my inexperience. I tried to print Alex's e-mail, but maybe the sensors decided that it was too commercial? I just want to say that Alex voiced it based on analog, and volume seems to be key in my system. I must mention that I've not put the(at least)200 hours on his player that Alex recommends, but you know that equipment only improves with time. I do know that his player has challenged me to fine-tune my analog. I'm not sure if(given my current finances) I can fine-tune my analog enough. I will try to post on Audiogon's analog section about Alex's player.
Thanks Mmakhak, I will fine and look up Alex's website. I need a cd transport/dac combo that don't do no monkey business-:). I am still debating among DCS stack, Emm Labs, MBL and Metronome. If it delivers analog like sound for reals that It is a keeper for long long time.
Guido, I am not trying to defend my product or the fact that Mmaksahk is a beginner (we all started learning at some point in time) but will have to say that, according to the "Hitchhiker’s guide to the Galaxy", Earth MKII was much better. :) So there is “a lot more and even better fish”. :)
Nilthepill, there is no upsampling in this particular design based on Denon 3910. This cheaper all-solid-state re-design was intended to be more affordable due to many requests that Brent Rainwater (APL Hi-Fi CSM) and I have received.
Mmakshak, it is very good to hear how much you like this Denon 3910 version, especially compared to your vinyl rig. To be honest, I have never been a big vinyl fan, but you're perfectly correct - besides all of its imperfections, the vinyl offers audio quality reference comparable to the original master tape. Why? Well, vinyl is pure analog. :) Sadly, just like digital, we are still limited to the actual vinyl recording quality (regardless of the year it was released).
Alex, I appreciate your defense of me, and I owe you many gifts for your Denon 3910. I have to say, though, that my 1981 and earlier lp's recommendation is based on listening, though.
I'm not completely sure that the APL Hi-Fi Denon 3910 still costs $2,500. I read on Alex's site that the base Denon 3910(from Denon) has gone up in price. I now listen to cd instead of lp. I've started another thread on Audiogon, "I've found the cd player for analog lovers"(or something like that). My analog system now needs tweaking to become another source(I have 2,000 lp's and 5 cd's-with access to many more cd's). My analog sounds darker(tracking force? At least that's where I'll start.). I just can't believe how this APL 3910 went from something I didn't listen to much(but was needed to access recordings made after 1981) to something that I listen to exclusively. I have some explanations, but this current APL really turned my thinking around. Currently, I think that analog may too easily be colored(if anything is off), and, what I thought was inherent in digital, really isn't. The irritating highs are gone. For example, we played the Beatle's White album in cd and lp. My friend, and I both preferred the vinyl. After he left, I slightly turned down the volume on the cd, and the cd beat the vinyl. I couldn't believe it! I now am wondering about the amount of information with digital. For instance, I had both the cd and XRCD of the Eagles', "Hell Freezes Over". The XRCD had much more detail. It may have included more of the Hall sound. I don't even know what XRCD is, really.
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.
