nc42acc
New member
Fantastic Mike! So will you be selling the MBL 101s off as demos by then? I better start saving for this trip.
Analog and Vinyl: no longer the benchmark
- Thread starter jmusica
- Start date
- Status
interesting thread, particularly to see the perspective here on the analogue / digital issue which is primarily technical. i have a somewhat different thought process... an audio system is simply a vehicle to experience art, therefore, any evaluation of technologies should probably have that as part of an overall framework. to make an evaluation of analogue vs digital audio, it is interesting to me to use visual arts as a parallel.
take painting: impressionist paintings are perhaps the lowest resolution form of painting when looked at up close, however, when you start to step back from the course brush strokes and take in the painting as a whole it is quite beautiful and the resolution is meaningless. such paintings sell for in excess of $100m. modern art has much higher resolution and detail but is not accurate in terms of presenting a scene which a person can actually see. these painting can also sell for huge sums. on the other hand, the great masters painted high resolution and realistic scenes. these paintings sell for comparatively paltry sums (vermeer excepted). taken to the extreme, very high resolution and realistic paintings can be bought at the mall for $50.
the point here is that in the art world, at least, resolution and realism are irrelevant. what matters is the (emotional) impact the work has on the viewer... sure, one can look at a painting and evaluate its resolution and realism but it is the experience which creates the value.
i am not saying that such a framework can resolves the issue... only that one goal in assembling a system is to focus on delivering a pleasing and enjoyable art experience rather than a perfect technical one. at some point spending increasingly large sums chasing that elusive "perfect" system, either digital or analog, becomes pointless in achieving this particular goal... especially if it means you have to eat cat food in old age while listening to music ;-)
there is also something to be learned from the photography version of the analog / digital debate, but i will save that for another post.
as always, YMMV... if one's enjoyment from this hobby is also technical (an aspect which i also enjoy and appreciate) then the calculus here is somewhat different.
take painting: impressionist paintings are perhaps the lowest resolution form of painting when looked at up close, however, when you start to step back from the course brush strokes and take in the painting as a whole it is quite beautiful and the resolution is meaningless. such paintings sell for in excess of $100m. modern art has much higher resolution and detail but is not accurate in terms of presenting a scene which a person can actually see. these painting can also sell for huge sums. on the other hand, the great masters painted high resolution and realistic scenes. these paintings sell for comparatively paltry sums (vermeer excepted). taken to the extreme, very high resolution and realistic paintings can be bought at the mall for $50.
the point here is that in the art world, at least, resolution and realism are irrelevant. what matters is the (emotional) impact the work has on the viewer... sure, one can look at a painting and evaluate its resolution and realism but it is the experience which creates the value.
i am not saying that such a framework can resolves the issue... only that one goal in assembling a system is to focus on delivering a pleasing and enjoyable art experience rather than a perfect technical one. at some point spending increasingly large sums chasing that elusive "perfect" system, either digital or analog, becomes pointless in achieving this particular goal... especially if it means you have to eat cat food in old age while listening to music ;-)
there is also something to be learned from the photography version of the analog / digital debate, but i will save that for another post.
as always, YMMV... if one's enjoyment from this hobby is also technical (an aspect which i also enjoy and appreciate) then the calculus here is somewhat different.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
opcorn:
...
Kingrex
Active member
I agree with the Harbeth thread where someone says inferior vinyl is less offensive than inferior digital. My vinyl is inferior but sweet and nice to listen to. Before I had my digital tuned it told you turn it down pretty quick. Each small change I made for the better allowed me to turn it up more and more. I can now take my preamp through all 23 steps on the attenuator. For the most part 9 to 19 is real nice. I just don't need it loud.
So I have a question, why has so much of this thread become about dynamic range. It's like that is the only measure of music. Does dynamic range equal tone. I believe it has something to do with it, but I don't believe it makes it. I honestly don't know what makes it. What I do know is focusing on improving the power supply od my server and reducing the amount of processes my server was doing there by decreasing noise in the overall system brought out large improvements in tone. Not only tone but decay. As the music got more clear and the tone and Decay increased, instruments sounded more like an actual instrument.
Back to dynamic range. I might say that too much dynamic range would be an issue for me. I don't have a remote and would find it troublesome having to get up to constantly adjust the volume to increase the sound at low passages or turn it down at high passages. To some degree there needs to be a compression of the dynamic range so that we can sit in our seat and enjoy the music without having it disappear or become overly loud. I assume most music was mastered with quite a bit of compression so listeners could e joy it in their cars. People may be going to Mikes to shoot out dynamic range. I am more interested in what sounds like music.
Having said that, I'm my system, I have found that digital can sound very very musical. Because of it's ease of use and access to so much content I enjoy I will continue to focus on that.
So I have a question, why has so much of this thread become about dynamic range. It's like that is the only measure of music. Does dynamic range equal tone. I believe it has something to do with it, but I don't believe it makes it. I honestly don't know what makes it. What I do know is focusing on improving the power supply od my server and reducing the amount of processes my server was doing there by decreasing noise in the overall system brought out large improvements in tone. Not only tone but decay. As the music got more clear and the tone and Decay increased, instruments sounded more like an actual instrument.
Back to dynamic range. I might say that too much dynamic range would be an issue for me. I don't have a remote and would find it troublesome having to get up to constantly adjust the volume to increase the sound at low passages or turn it down at high passages. To some degree there needs to be a compression of the dynamic range so that we can sit in our seat and enjoy the music without having it disappear or become overly loud. I assume most music was mastered with quite a bit of compression so listeners could e joy it in their cars. People may be going to Mikes to shoot out dynamic range. I am more interested in what sounds like music.
Having said that, I'm my system, I have found that digital can sound very very musical. Because of it's ease of use and access to so much content I enjoy I will continue to focus on that.
We can work something out I’m sure. [emoji6]
I’ll have many more goodies by then. Stay tuned. Next up: big ass amps!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Kingrex
Active member
No D'Agostino please. To overplayed everywhere. Would be interesting to hear something SS push a 89DB speaker.
Nope. The bloated lower midrange bothers me. I guess I’m the only one who worries about brand longevity too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Jim Smith
Member
For me, it comes down to which is more musically engaging in a given system. Even so, many variables can affect the outcome, with the biggest offenders being less-than-optimum system (or tt or digital) set-up.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
What concert halls do you visit with regularity? It might have importance depending on musical tastes and also demands for fidelity, exactly as stated by Stereophiles founder. Based on my exposure (no not literally) to thousands of audiophiles, that's all over the map.
You never said which of your tracks you were intimately familiar with that you brought to MLs to listen to and had you hearing vinyl better than digital. That is crucial.
The more dynamic range the better. It's exciting.
For me personally, emotional experience goes hand in hand with realism and resolution. I have never emotionally enjoyed my Beethoven string quartet recordings as much as now, with my system producing a realistic tone and fine, delicate resolution of detail from bowing transients and wooden resonances.
Also, resolution entails clear separation of simultaneous musical lines, which enables enhanced intellectual understanding. The latter can greatly elevate emotional involvement in music, at least for me.
a.wayne
Well-known member
LOL. Can you guess what I'm bringing to the party?
As I said Mr Wayne, bring those trusted ears and the widest dynamic range vinyl you have. I'll bring the truth serum box, p-p SPL measurement mic/hardware and what you think doesn't exist above. We're going to all see about that 19th century tech vinyl vs digital dynamic range thing first hand.
Still waiting for the list , these recordings with no compression are nameless ... ?
Analog vs digital. At the end of the day, folks will have their own preferences. It is hard to argue against the technical advantages of digital. (In fact, I believe that the future belongs to digital). But I can understand why some folks prefer analog. I enjoy both but I have no plans to invest in my analog rig.
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
You sound almost worried now.
But you have no worries. You will simply bring the highest dynamic range, widest frequency response, etc, etc, needle in groove 19th century tech pieces of plastic you have. Electric canon shots for all we care. I will bring the digital dynamic range, frequency response, etc, etc tracks, the p-p mic, etc.
All will see and hear firsthand the objective metrics superiority of 19th vs 21st century tech, now won't we? No need to check DR databases in vain.
cheers,
AJ
could not agree more -- resolution and realism are very highly correlated with a great listening experience, just not perfectly correlated. at some point chasing the perfect technical experience becomes and end in itself and does not serve the art experience... sometimes we can lose track of the forest.
by way of a, perhaps, extreme example: i don't think i have had or will ever have a more thrilling and audio experience than i did many years ago at the age of 18 riding around in my car listening to music on the 8-track player. certainly a low-fi system in a high noise floor environment... but, damn, that just might be as good as it gets!
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
That's why I made it very clear day 1, mere preferences were not being discussed, only objective metrics. Folks can prefer 8 track if they wish.
Silly to argue about preference. Now claimed objective metrics for said preference....
Exactly!! The total subjective experience goes far beyond sound>ears, "just listening", etc, etc. Many more sensory factors involved.
Kingrex
Active member
I had a pro come to my house, evaluate my TT and set it up. It's better but no dramatic change. He said it's a decent system. It is performing to it's price point. If I want to step it up, he suggested upgrading the table first with something in the $5k range. That is for a table alone. He is not offering to sell anything, just stating that is where I need to go next to get more from what I have. That $5k does not include the arm, cartridge, and phono stage. Of course brands are a subjective choice, yet any belt drive needs to be pretty decent to surpass what I have. He did suggest some old direct drive for less. The biggest detractor with my table, in his opinion is the Rega motor. Having sold them and others for years, he feels they lack jump and life. The motor that is. That's his opinion. I had tried to get a Road Runner but they don't make it anymore.
Anyhow, I feel a little vindicated in my comments on what sort of performance I get from a $7k vinyl setup compared to a $9k digital setup. I am getting very itchy not having my digital at the moment. I miss the musicallity of the digital. Maybe I will get it working this weekend. I bought a HDPlex internal voltage regular PS and it takes a 6 pin molex. I have to do some soldering. Can't wait to get it up and running again.
So circling back around, my vinyl is pleasant, polite and sweet. Non fatiguing and a little warm,. My digital has far better frequency extension, a lot more clarity and resolution, more dynamics and musically engaging. Instruments are much more real and details are easy to hear making it more relaxing. I don't have to strain to hear what is going on.
This is me speaking out my butt, however I feel I am getting digital performance in the range of the Clear Audio Innovation table with a DS Audio Master 1 optical cartridge. That was a setup I listened to that very much mimics what I hear from my digital playback. Maybe it can be done for a little less, but I have heard quite a few system and I'm pretty confident I get a very musical and realistic level of performance. I have spent a lot more time than most people tuning it, listening to experts and implementing their suggestions. You don't just throw pieces together and get what I have. A lot of thought has gone into everything from the power out of my panel to the BIOS setting In my computer. I still stand behind the belief that digital done right can be amazing and surpass Vinyl in the $10k to $20k range. It has to be correct or it will shut you down, but it can be done. That is still my belief based upon what I have heard.
Anyhow, I feel a little vindicated in my comments on what sort of performance I get from a $7k vinyl setup compared to a $9k digital setup. I am getting very itchy not having my digital at the moment. I miss the musicallity of the digital. Maybe I will get it working this weekend. I bought a HDPlex internal voltage regular PS and it takes a 6 pin molex. I have to do some soldering. Can't wait to get it up and running again.
So circling back around, my vinyl is pleasant, polite and sweet. Non fatiguing and a little warm,. My digital has far better frequency extension, a lot more clarity and resolution, more dynamics and musically engaging. Instruments are much more real and details are easy to hear making it more relaxing. I don't have to strain to hear what is going on.
This is me speaking out my butt, however I feel I am getting digital performance in the range of the Clear Audio Innovation table with a DS Audio Master 1 optical cartridge. That was a setup I listened to that very much mimics what I hear from my digital playback. Maybe it can be done for a little less, but I have heard quite a few system and I'm pretty confident I get a very musical and realistic level of performance. I have spent a lot more time than most people tuning it, listening to experts and implementing their suggestions. You don't just throw pieces together and get what I have. A lot of thought has gone into everything from the power out of my panel to the BIOS setting In my computer. I still stand behind the belief that digital done right can be amazing and surpass Vinyl in the $10k to $20k range. It has to be correct or it will shut you down, but it can be done. That is still my belief based upon what I have heard.
And I still agree with you. Vinyl can be absolutely amazing, but only at a great expense. Then you have frequency extension, correctness of tone, dynamics, precision, clarity, you name it. And it still depends on the quality of pressing which is not always what it should be.
These days you'll get great sound much easier from digital.
...to continue the train of thought from my earlier post (#202) exploring analog vs digital audio using analogies from the visual arts, there are some pretty close parallels in photography. the take away points for me are:
1. both digital and analog photography can yield astoundingly good results.
2. for very good work, it is very hard or impossible to distinguish between the two.
3. for poor work, it is easier to distinguish between the two.
4. good digital is relatively easy / good analog is very, very, very hard.
5. the very best analog photography can be materially better than the very best digital. however, the technical skill, experience and proficiency required to achieve this is at a quite high level. [one caveat: really good analog photography has become inordinately harder given the disappearance of many films and other materials, especially, kodachrome!!]
obviously, there is more detail and nuance here, but from reading this thread it seems there is a very similar dynamic in audio... it is just too hard and expensive to get really good analog; thus, the path of least resistance is digital.
1. both digital and analog photography can yield astoundingly good results.
2. for very good work, it is very hard or impossible to distinguish between the two.
3. for poor work, it is easier to distinguish between the two.
4. good digital is relatively easy / good analog is very, very, very hard.
5. the very best analog photography can be materially better than the very best digital. however, the technical skill, experience and proficiency required to achieve this is at a quite high level. [one caveat: really good analog photography has become inordinately harder given the disappearance of many films and other materials, especially, kodachrome!!]
obviously, there is more detail and nuance here, but from reading this thread it seems there is a very similar dynamic in audio... it is just too hard and expensive to get really good analog; thus, the path of least resistance is digital.
Jim Smith
Member
Agreed.
Having never heard a vinyl playback rig - no matter how expensive - performing at it's full potential - in hundreds of high end audio systems, whether owned by audiophiles, reviewers or dealers, I have always privately wondered why the owner persists.
In most every instance (assuming basics such as location & mechanical set-up are good), about an hour's worth or so of adjustment & listening could easily address most of the issues, and take it to a much higher level.
All too often, a huge waste of money, because the potential is never reached.
IMO, of course.
Also, I'm NOT saying that there aren't some vinyl playback rigs that sound awesome, performing to their full potential. I simply have never encountered one in the hundreds of occasions listed above.
In those cases, digital done right makes more sense. Again, IMO.
- Status