Width of Stage

If you can hear them on your LP and SACD, but not CD, unless your CDP has some issue, the odds are it is just not mixed the same. They are mixed differently, more often than not, especially a 25yr old CD, not to mention the record likely has some compression of the highest volume peaks that brings out the rest.

Is there any point in pointing out that the following statement shows a lack of understanding of the timing of multi-channel digitized audio (or any digitized system) for that matter?  All that matters is the analog bandwidth, jitter, channel to channel timing jitter, and signal to noise ratio assuming the sampling rate is sufficient to capture the analog and allow reasonable analog filters. Sampling rate has literally no effect on timing beyond supporting the analog bandwidth. Absolutely none. It is a common misconception that it does, but it does not. No room for a full course on Nyquist here, but feel free to research.

Okay so you play your record, stylus traces the groove. Which by the way the smallest squiggles on the groove wall are so incredibly small they’re on the order of some large organic molecules. So incredible detail. No idea how many times you’d have to sample to trace an organic molecule but got a pretty good hunch its more than thousands per second, and probably up there in the millions. Orders of magnitude at any rate above any current or even proposed rates of digital.

Which does not change at all that what you stated was categorically wrong. Why not take the time to learn something critical to the hobby instead of repeating inaccurate information and misleading people?

No room for a full course on the history of Perfect Sound Forever, MP3, etc. But feel free to research.

The big difference (warmth of LP aside) is the width of the stage, is quit a bit wider when playing the LP! Is this normal?

Yes, no, maybe, and all open to interpretation.

Other than the additional mainly high frequency noise in vinyl, the other big variable is cross-talk, which can surprisingly improve imaging perception, especially in untreated rooms by reducing the impact of reflections which can make imaging fuzzy and bringing the image more between the speakers, though people will claim "wider" though really just better.  Realistically, when you go to a live music event, how often are instruments or amplified sounds coming from outside an angle of the typical listening position with speaker placement. For many, speakers are 30 degrees on either side of center which is wider than most viewing positions. The reflections you are going to get from your own room.

BINGO! ... though I am not sure the level of crosstalk is sufficient to cancel enough of the sound from the opposite channel such that the signal from each speaker is isolated to each ear, at least at some level.  Look up ambiophonics, a modern take.

asctim6 posts05-14-2020 2:41pmThe interesting thing about channel cross talk in LP playback is that it is in reverse polarity, which potentially mimics the effect of stereo widening methods such as Polk SDA and Carver Sonic Holography, except it lacks the time delay and any HRTF effects.