May be it has. I was on the threshold of purchasing an EAR tube or Modwright Sony 5400 player and happened to hear a PS Audio DAC/bridge setup through reference full range speakers. I am a vinyl lover (Rega Planar 9/EAR phono preamp) and was very favorably impressed. I read the website and learned that part of the reason for the excellent sound is error free reading of the disc, which generally doesn't happen even with expensive CD players. Furthermore, it uses a Wolfson DAC, which is the same manufacturer as in the EAR acute CD player I was considering. I have been reluctant to consider computer audio because of a learning curve and the amount of time involved. I now believe that it may be worthwhile. Opinions?
When is digital going to get the soul of music?
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.
835 responses Add your response
As a part time recording engineer whose focus is live, on locations recordings, I'd say digital gets the soul very well indeed! Go buy Frank Vignola Trio (Standards Live) or Felipe Salles (Timeline) an example of shows that I recorded and were released by the artist. I think they capture the live event well. For the Frank show I was unaware that he was going to release it until it was pressed. Certainly there are things I would have edited out between songs but, hey, it was a live event and that is how it was. Of course these were recorded in high rez format but sre only available as CD's. I listen to the 24/96. The CD's are very close to the high rez. and you are hardly missing anything. I have hundreds of other shows that I've done by artists such as Spyro Gyra, David Bromberg, Bill Evans, Arlo Guthrie, Marty Ehrlich, Ivo Papasov, Duke Robillard and others that capture the events nicely. As a matter of fact, I'm just finishing a Kenny Neal show that "takes you there". You can sit back and listen until your spouse divorces you for abandonment, it is that engaging. Also, I have an large LP collection and enjoy listening to it too........but, IMO, analog's best is done through tape not LP. |
Yeah, I'm with Rockadanny. I finally got what I consider superb headphone sound with my EMM SE separates and a Ray Samuels B52 amp with highly upgraded tubes and Stealth Indra ICs. With SACD or, say, the Beatles 2009 box, it's off the charts in quality to me (after a long line of annoying false starts with glare/piercing highs/muddy bass or hyped up detail). But tubes were the real breakthrough, especially great vintage/NOS ones. Tubes forever... |
My CD-based system got it. Each step was an improvement towards reproducing the soul of the music. Long, arduous journey, wading through lots of audio BS. For my system, it turned out to be tubes everywhere, even in the CDP. NOS tubes. And the most transparent cables I could get my hands on, which did no harm in other areas. My goal was always transparency, but with soul. If a new piece was more transparent than the old, but my system lost some of its soul, out it went. I always figured if I had to settle, I'd settle for soul over transparency. Fortunately, I did not have to settle. I have transparency WITH soul - and am thrilled. |
Tape Project tapes on my Ampex or vinyl on my SME 30 sound better to me than anything I've heard on any digital gear I have tried or any digital gear that I have heard. I'm trying a MacBook pro with a Weiss DAC 1 right now and it's very, very good. It delivers the best that digital can offer however, it's still a shadow of the best analog. The problem, in my opinion, lies not in the player but rather in the medium itself. Based on that, and in answer to the question, it is my belief that digital can't get to the soul of music the way analog does. |
Tbg, yes, classic Sinatra recordings are an excellent test for a system in good form: the orchestra should sound massive and deep, with tremendous bite and clarity in all the brass, while Sinatra's voice is superbly smooth, low key and controlled, riding easily upon that wall of rich sound. What happens what digital is "done right" ... Frank |
Tbg, Last night I compared Frank Sinatra and Count Basie at the Sands using the original vinyl release and the server with the source disc being a SHM release to the hard drive. While I am sure that Sinatra/Basie at the Sands is a good sounding recording, I'd suggest evaluating Analog vs. Digital using something like this: Bassface Trio Plays Gershwin Best, Alex Peychev |
I would like to describe my experiences the last several days. I am not bragging about my system, but I think I have the best sound that I have had in nearly 50 years at this. My digital uses an Apple Powerbook Pro running Pure Music on Hog and memory modes and my dacs are the Weiss Dac202 or the H-Cat dac. My vinyl is a Bergman Sindre with the Ortofon A-90 cartridge tracking at 2.00 grams and a H-Cat phono stage. I know few here know the H-Cat stuff, but I find it very resolving. Last night I compared Frank Sinatra and Count Basie at the Sands using the original vinyl release and the server with the source disc being a SHM release to the hard drive. I heard a very different music performance. The vinyl is very pleasing with Sinatra sounding very real and smooth. The audience and band are present but somewhat vaguely located in the background. It was very listenable. The digital on the H-Cat dac was very fast and dynamic with the audience quite precisely located and at some points in the performance there was an edge to his voice that might be mike overload or a true edge in his 50 year old voice. This was present with both dacs. Generally, the digital performance sounded more like being there, but at others it sounded strained and discontinuous. This also was true using the Weiss 202 which had 24 bits rather than the 16 of the H-Cat. The Weiss gives a somewhat more distant perspective but otherwise had the same limitations. I guess that my conclusion is that I can live with either, that both have strong points, that higher definition of backgrounds is better in digital as well as dynamics, that digital sounds piecy, as though it is a puzzle put together. Perhaps, were I to have this recording in 192/24 HD, it might be better. I don't expect ever to have HD resolution on all of my music, however. So what will I listen to? Well, I have only about a 10-20% overlap in my music, so it will somewhat depend on what music I want to listen too. There is no question that digital on a server is the most convenient, but I will never give up on vinyl for listenability and wholeness. |
Alex, I'm sure there are many great TTs but in my small world it often resembles discussion about performance of Rolls-Royce vs. Bentley. For the money I could spend on decent TT I upgraded speakers from average to great but could also upgrade main amp or DAC. LP music selection is very poor especially with less popular genres (World Music, Indian Classical) therefore my main system will always be digital. I will include TT as soon as I get best speakers and amp money can buy and will still have money to spend. Perhaps for all this to happen I would have to win the Lotto or kill my wife. |
Frank, agree 100% on your 12/21/10 post: "Tvad, actually the answer IS all 3. What makes it even more bizarre is that you can pick up the total system of someone who says answer 1, plunk it down, absolutely perfectly transported and setup identically in every way, matching room treatments, etc, in the home of someone who says answer 2, and the answer for this new setup CAN still be 2, even for the original owner if he were to visit the new location of his former system." for many reasons talked in latter posts. To give you example: even plugging my mono amps from its current resident outlets (nothing fancy, just stock) to *different* similar outlets or even the recently installed 20 amp dedicated line w/ Oyaide outlets can change answer from my current 1 to 3 or even 2. Go figure that one out. I really can't, other than may be luck? |
Kijanki, when I said house I did not mean just the listening room, that's why I specifically said "every part of its environment" -- gee, I think the factory down the road just finished for the day; hmmm, I wonder if Cathy has her computer on in her bedroom; man, another one of those steamy, humid days -- see what I mean. Frankly, when a system is REALLY working properly, the listening room is totally irrelevant: if you had a real string quartet playing in that room, would it "not work" because you didn't have the right room bits sorted out ... ? As regards synergy, see my comment earlier. Finally, I have as much respect for vinyl as digital: I have heard stunning LP playback, and truly appalling sound coming from a quarter of a million dollars worth of such gear, supposedly optimised and tweaked! Frank |
Frank - you're right about the house. Unfortunately it is the most expensive part of any audio system. With much less than perfect room, varying quality of the recordings, synergy of all components and taste/preference of the listener, discussing if best digital is as good as best analog (on even Tuesdays) is strictly academic, at least to me. One thing I know - wise man told me once "Don't have a cow, man" so I sold my TT. |
Tvad, actually the answer IS all 3. What makes it even more bizarre is that you can pick up the total system of someone who says answer 1, plunk it down, absolutely perfectly transported and setup identically in every way, matching room treatments, etc, in the home of someone who says answer 2, and the answer for this new setup CAN still be 2, even for the original owner if he were to visit the new location of his former system. Why, because the house itself and every part of its environment is part of the system also! This is what can make this whole process of getting things right so very, very hard ... Frank |
| Post removed |
OK, here it comes... Merry Christmas & Happy New Year Wesołych Świąt i szczęśliwego Nowego Roku Kellemes karácsonyi ünnepeket és Boldog újévet! Noeliniz Ve Yeni Yiliniz Kutlu Olsun ! Nollaig chridheil agus Bliadhna mhath ur! Pozdrevlyayu s prazdnikom Rozhdestva i s Novim Godom ! Boas Festas e um feliz Ano Novo Fröhliche Weihnachten und ein glückliches Neues Jahr Prieci'gus Ziemsve'tkus un Laimi'gu Jauno Gadu! Linksmu Kaledu ir laimingu Nauju metu Shinnen omedeto. Kurisumasu Omedeto ! E gueti Wïnâchte & E glecklichs Nej Johr Edo bri'cho o rish d'shato brich'to Tezze Iliniz Yashi Olsun ! Winshuyu sa Svyatkami i z Novym godam ! Nedeleg laouen na bloav ezh mat ! Chestita Koleda i Shtastliva Nova Godina Zorionak eta Urte Berri On ! Sretan Bozic! Prejeme Vam Vesele Vanoce a Stastny novy rok Glædelig Jul og godt nytår Rõõmsaid Jõulupühi ja Head uut aastat Joyeux Noël et Bonne Année! Kala Christougenna Ki'eftihismenos O Kenourios Chronos Gilotsavt Krist'es Shobas & Gilosavt akhal ts'els Feliz Navidad y Próspero Año Nuevo Mo'adim Lesimkha. Shanah Tova ! Nollaig Shona Dhuit ! Srekan Bozik I Nova Godina Bon Pasco i Feliz Aña Nobo Wilujeng Natal Sareng Warsa Enggal ! Nadolig LLawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda Craciun fericit si un An Nou fericit Geseende Kerfees en 'n gelukkige nuwe jaa Gëzuar Krishlindjet Vitin e Ri Juullimi Ukiortaassamilu Pilluarit Schéi Krëschtdeeg an e Schéint Néi Joer Krist Yesu Ko Shuva Janma Utsav Ko Upalaxhma Hardik Shuva & Naya Barsa Ko harkik Shuvakamana E ku odun, e hu iye' dun Christmas Shubhakaankshalu & Nootana Samvatchara Subhakanshalu Noflike Krystdagen en in protte Lok en Seine yn it Nije Jier Gleðileg Jól og Farsaelt Komandi ár Nathar Puthu Varuda Valthukkal God Jul och Gott Nytt År Vesele bozicne praznike in srecno novo leto Hyvää Joulua - 0nnellista uutta vuotta Bon Nadal e Bo Ani Novo Bon Natale e Bon capu d' annu Selamat Hari Natal & Selamat Tahun Baru Sung Tan Chuk Ha Bonn e Erez Ane Zul saryn bolon shine ony mend devshuulye Sretan Bozic. Vesela Nova Godine Subha nath thalak Vewa. Subha Aluth Awrudhak Vewa Vesele Vianoce a stastny novy rok Veseloho Vam Rizdva i Shchastlyvoho Novoho Roku Buon Natale e Felice Anno Nuovo Hoesenestotse & Aa'e Emona'e Gajan Kristnaskon & Bonan Novjaron Mele Kalikimaka & Hauoli Makahiki Hou Pax hominibus bonae voluntatis Vrolijk Kerstfeest en een Gelukkig Nieuwjaar! |
Aplhifi and Nilthepill, For me *System Synergy* = Combination of components, and accessories, and tweaking, that intentionally or by lucky coincidence minimises the level of "nasty", "micro" distortion, the bane of virtually all hifi gear. If recordings is bad or compressed no digital (or vinyl for that matter) system in the world can make that hight freq nastiness go away and make it sound sweeterSince I have experienced many times the complete opposite to that, I disagree 100%. Since there is a bit of a groove happening here, I'll throw in my bit too: seasons greetings to all those who agree and disagree with me ... Cheers, Frank |
It's so close to Christmas I think it's time to spin some serious holiday music: Jingle One of the few holiday CDs I'll play on my system. |
Indeed it is very hard to get details, dynamics and warmth but like with right tubes and system *synergy* (here we ago again- components, cabling and matched speakers) it is possible to get both, may be not to the fullest as experienced in real life but what I perceive is best possible today in audio reproduction. If recordings is bad or compressed no digital (or vinyl for that matter) system in the world can make that hight freq nastiness go away and make it sound sweeter- not even mine ;-) Boy that Kanye's new album is real good- musically, but recordings is horribly compressed. On the other hand say albums by Arcade fire or Deerhunter or The walkmen or Dave Holland's hands or Wynton Marsallis's Vitoria suite- all a pleasure to listen to. |
"Either they throw away dynamics, detail, and resolution but coax out a sweet tonal balance with much of the warmth of analog. Or, they get resolution, drive and dynamics but the upper mid and high frequencies drive me from the room." When I run my mhdt Paradisea with the NOS Tung Sol tube in my current rig, I would say it does extremely well in regards to delivering dynamics, detail and resolution with a touch of sweet tonal balance and nothing offensive in the highs. With the stock RCA tube, more towards the first camp. I also use an mhdt Constantine and it falls a notch or two more towards the second camp. I've used these in several system configurations and can also say the specific results can vary greatly depending on what the rest of the system is. Currently, these DACs are proving themselves to be amazing overachievers especially for the cost. ALbert, if you are ever in Baltimore DC metro area with some time I'd be happy to give an audition if you are interested. |
Frank - I see that I have missed quite a few posts on here today! This is a very busy season for me, as you can imagine. Anyway, Albert and Aplhifi have certainly gone much farther than I ever could towards answering the question you last put to me - all I can say is "yeah, what they said!" :) Seriously, though, one of the reasons I love this site is that I can read such posts by Albert or Atmasphere, who are both excellent at describing the technical reasons in layman's terms for things that I know I can hear, but don't have the technical knowledge to explain to someone else why I am hearing it. I realize that's a terrible sentence I just wrote, but it's late, and there is a reason I am a musician, not a writer, LOL! |
Nilthepill, I appreciate your comments. My list of digital trials would be long, it goes back more than 25 years. The last serious attempt was a couple of years ago, a very expensive one box player sent to me by the importer. It was not to my liking although a reviewer friend of mine bought one and it's still his digital reference. I'm looking for a player that has resolution like analog but without the jitter and unpleasant high frequencies. It seems to me that players fall on either side of a line. Either they throw away dynamics, detail, and resolution but coax out a sweet tonal balance with much of the warmth of analog. Or, they get resolution, drive and dynamics but the upper mid and high frequencies drive me from the room. |
Albertporter and others who have had frustrating experience with digital, I am not sure which $$$$$ digital you have tried but, i tell you, if you ever have a chance give it a try on the Zanden digital combo. It would be even more rewarding and eye opening experience if you have a luxury to audition the combo in an all Zanden system... I have a good fortune to have an all Zanden system at home for now, oh may be 4 years and the Zanden actually beats analog more times than not. And my analog (uses Zanden Phono pre also) is also optimized. On excellent recordings it is * hard* to tell the difference. I love my Zanden digital especially there is more software choices available in CD than Vinyl. It delivers jaw dropping life like performance every time i put on *modern* ( read: new releases) Jazz or rock or classical CDs. Better the recordings, better the performance. I have practically the whole CD catalogue from RR and Mapleshade and it even excels the already stellar performance I get from *regular* jazz/classical labels. It is truly the digital with tons of soul- all with the humble 16/44.1 CD format. It features no oversampling and true phase coherent design. I am not here to say mine is better than yours -or brag, just to prove form personal experience that the digital * has* got soul, you just have to find the right source- like many have found in theirs. Sure analog tape could be better and Vinyl too ( at times, yes even in my set up it does exceed digital at times for certain genre) but what good is having finite number of master tapes copies whereas there is much more choices with Vinyl material and even more with CDs. So yes, I have found a soul in digital. It was not not an easy journey though, both in terms of $$ and time. I, too, went through (audition and bought) number of digital units prior to this- one notable being the Metronome digital combo. Peace!! |
| Post removed |
""""It is clear how much in-love you are with your transport, and I appreciate that, but have you seen how a top-line Esoteric VRDS-NEO compares to the "outsourced" transports you are talking about? Take a close look at this here. The "outsourced transports" are on the left. Please note that the shiny disk you see on the picture is a Magnesium clamper that is not only a clamper but the actual spindle motor. In other words, it clamps and spins the disc at the same time.""""" Aplhifi, Ok, I looked and was unimpressed. As I said, the Flatfish is an outstanding performer. All the heavy armor never did any good against the fleet of hoof power hitting Mongols. All the heavy mass CD spinners with whatever clamps cannot make any ground against the short path simplest parts Flatfish. The reason is, the answer is in the 47 Lab philosophy, "Only the simplest can accomplish the most complex." |
(Alex) Sure, but in my experience there are also recordings available on high-res digital media that, for some reason, sound better than the analog release, so I guess good digital is not a bad thing to have around. I don't disagree that digital is good to have around. I have a player but it's really only impressive on Blue Ray. I'm frequently frustrated to find an artist I really love (an excellent example HERE ) and find there is no LP release. Buying and playing on poor performing digital only makes me angry, most of my CDs get transferred to my iPod and play in the car where the sound is so bad you don't notice :^). (Alex again)Maybe you would consider auditioning my NWO-M digital player, and I'd be thrilled if Joe Harley can hear it too!! I would be pleased to hear what you have. Joe lives in California, so unfortunately I only see him at shows. When I was younger I traveled to visit friends out there pretty often. Many fond memories of good times with Steve McCormack, Richard Vandersteen, Joe Harley, Mike Elliott (Counterpoint) and many others out there but we have all gotten older and life more complicated. |
I can very much sympathise with your "battle", as in many ways I have gone through similar myself: the difference being that in my case I was able to reach a positive, rather than negative outcome, with what would be considered pretty ordinary equipment, playing very ordinary CD's; others have seemingly achieved similar results. I will just repeat what I have said elsewhere that I have experienced very expensive, highly tweaked, at home vinyl setups that have sounded a) stunning, and b) excrutiatingly harsh and unpleasant, so I certainly am aware how there can be two ends of the scale, irrespective of the time and money spent. I appreciate your passion, I felt that way at one time a good many years ago. As time passes you realize it's a delusion that you can make a difference and then get down to the business of making music the best you can with what really works and what is available instead of just wishing. I am friends with a good many people in the business, have completed advertising photography for dozens and dozens of high end brands, both analog and digital. The short answer is, only long term listening can reveal what is really right and what is not. Digital can be "good" but never the level of analog master tape or LP at its limit. Over the years we have had duplicate copies of both CD and LP and compared with many brands and quality levels. If you get LP reproduction poor enough and digital good enough then digital can make a good showing. If you have analog at the best it can be and digital the best it can be then analog wins unless there is an extraordinary (bad or good) copy on both sides. I can't cling to the <20% times when digital makes a "decent" showing for an investment of $25K +. Over the last few years I've worked hard to accumulate master tapes. I had my Studer rebuild two years ago by the (previous) head guy at Studer USA. You have no idea what this machine can do, it will scare the hell out of you sometimes and set your head straight as to what is possible. My turntable when it's maxed out at 100% can get maybe 80% (+) of what the tape is doing. The CD is not worth comparing at that point, believe me. Also, read this (partial) post of mine on this same thread nearly three years ago. It's still very much true and why I sometime come off as angry. I've had at least a hundred thousand dollars worth of digital through my system, most on loan or product that was a perspective item for review. I also bought a lot. |
Alex, thanks for that set of thoughts! I agree with you, minimising phase noise is everything, but I would say the only place where it is critical is right next to the DAC chip (or discrete circuitry, Accuphase, say). The big trouble with separate transport and converter box is getting the clean clock where it is needed, and of course as you know there are many ways of doing this. I am intrigued to note that the newish Naim DAC solves the problem by having multiple, slightly different frequency crystals, so you have minimal buffering needs AND bare crystal phase noise. And, by all accounts, it can do an excellent job of the converting ... Frank |
Muralman1, It is clear how much in-love you are with your transport, and I appreciate that, but have you seen how a top-line Esoteric VRDS-NEO compares to the "outsourced" transports you are talking about? Take a close look at this here. The "outsourced transports" are on the left. Please note that the shiny disk you see on the picture is a Magnesium clamper that is not only a clamper but the actual spindle motor. In other words, it clamps and spins the disc at the same time. Good luck, Alex Peychev |
Albertporter, when I read your response to my earlier posting I was somewhat taken aback, and hence responded a little brusquely, I apologise for that. Following that posting by myself, I went "Back to the Future" and looked at the thread material of late '08', and very vigorous it was too! To me, the nub of it in relation to yourself was your comment: There was a time when I put all my effort into making digital right and at one time I had my system where digital and analog were very close. One day a friend who had not visited in a long time, a guy with excellent ears, listened with me and pointed out the fact that I had managed to "down grade" the analog source to make the digital warm and friendly enough to enjoy. I can very much sympathise with your "battle", as in many ways I have gone through similar myself: the difference being that in my case I was able to reach a positive, rather than negative outcome, with what would be considered pretty ordinary equipment, playing very ordinary CD's; others have seemingly achieved similar results. I will just repeat what I have said elsewhere that I have experienced very expensive, highly tweaked, at home vinyl setups that have sounded a) stunning, and b) excrutiatingly harsh and unpleasant, so I certainly am aware how there can be two ends of the scale, irrespective of the time and money spent. The answer, to repeat myself, is system engineering, and yes, in digital it can be much harder to get it right, compared to vinyl, but superb results on that "nasty" 44.1k digital CAN be achieved. Finally, a "thought" experiment. I would suggest that your own system, in top form, be modified by the addition of a black box completely hard wired in, with a bypass switch. This would be engineered so well that it would be 100% transparent with the bypass engaged (unlike how all these DBT setups most surely are typically set up,) to yourself and anyone else you care to have listen. In the black box is a "done right" 44.1 analogue to digital converter feeding a 44.1 digital to analogue converter, engineered CORRECTLY with current technology, and, you can guess what's coming, I would seriously suggest that the people listening would find it close to impossible to pick when the extra circuitry was part of the mix ... Frank |
Muralman1, The 47 Lab Flatfish transport is house made. It is a top loader rigidly supported. The sound feeding my DAC is as pure as the driven snow. I share your thought on simplicity. Sure, the metal transport housing pieces are house-made, not the actual CD transport. CD transport is the laser/tracking/spindle motor assembly and associated Digital Signal Processing and Servo. That cannot be house-made so it is either Philips or Sony. Best, Alex Peychev |
Frank, When it comes to top-quality, there are only several CD transport manufacturers in the world of which Sony, Philips and Pioneer are used the most for building audiophile equipment. There are some manufacturers building their own mechanisms, but the Digital Signal Processors (DSPs) used are still Sony, Philips or Pioneer (and strangely enough, some recent Sony and Denon products use Panasonic). This being said, I have extensive in-depth experience with all of the above that includes pure CD, CD/SACD and CD/SACD/DVD transports. You are correct that it is much easier to obtain best results with a regular CD transport, but there are limitations to it. The processors are old, noisy and 16 bit (no headroom). The disc spins at x1 speed so there is not much room for large size memory buffering (only 512KB of FIFO memory is used), and the so called "read until right" is impossible, so you hit it and it skips. On the other hand, most CD/SACD/DVD universal transports are built with newer, faster and quieter DSPs with at least 24 bit resolution (lots of headroom for CD data processing). The DSPs have built-in memory controllers and large SDRAM memory devices attached to them (16, 32 or even 64MB). The disc spins at x4 filling up the SDRAM memory. The laser pick-up can go back to a problematic passage and re-read it until the best information is retrieved, all while you are enjoying uninterrupted audio data coming from the memory buffer. The transport jitter is greatly reduced. But what is the problem with such transport then? Unlike CD-only transport, the “universal beast” needs multiple clocks produced by a PLL-based multi-clock generator, usually locked to a 27MHz video clock reference. The PLLs used are very jittery thus decreasing the entire transport performance. But what if the original PLLs and VCOs are replaced with a single PLL solution that is so advanced that its phase noise is as low as the one of a bare crystal? You have a winner, and there is no regular CD transport capable of competing with it, IMHO! Best, Alex Peychev |
