Axpona 2015 Pics

Bobolaclune said:
Really? Quite a surprising response. In a field littered with controversy, argument , contentiousness and widely divergent viewpoints , there are few things most audiophiles would agree with more (reluctantly or otherwise), than the sonic merits of analog over digital. There may be a justifiable preference for digital over analog from any number of standpoints (cost, convenience, availability ....) but it would be a tough stance to take with any test Group of carbon-based lifeforms , that the digital sources sounded better. Maybe I've led a sheltered life for the last 20 years of audiophilia but I can't recall ever hearing someone defending digital over analog when it came to more authentically reproducing a musical performance.
Click to expand...

God this analog loving mindset just never quiets down.
 
Bobolaclune said:
Trendy.... ok you seem to be an authority on this subject so I'll exit this conversation before we experience the added noise and all the wow/flutter an intelligent discourse might generate . I guess I was ahead of the times when I kept my vinyl from 30 years ago and played my turntables ever since. Love being a trendsetter .....
Click to expand...
FWIW, I only gave up my LP's at about the time the LP revival started, and I still listen to them in others' systems with enjoyment. But the best digital sounds better to me now (and did even 10 years ago), and it seems to me that the best "affordable" digital (and you can use whatever monetary values you want here) continues to improve faster than similarly priced LP playback.

I'm not sure what you might want in an "intelligent discourse". Look at Michael Fremer's measurements of turntables; even very expensive ones have measurable speed inaccuracies and wow/flutter which can be audible to those sensitve to these problems.
 
I love all my sources. On some my digital spanks my vinyl. On some albums, it's the opposite. Throw the R2R in the mix and all hell lets loose. I like my digital for convenience and my analog for a greater connection (to the music).

I will say this much, for classical, I prefer digital. The surface noise of vinyl really distracts from the music.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
And who even tries to disagree with the fact that the best an analog tape source can manage for noise is -75-80 dB, and very few machines manage that.
 
Mike said:
I love all my sources. On some my digital spanks my vinyl. On some albums, it's the opposite. Throw the R2R in the mix and all hell lets loose. I like my digital for convenience and my analog for a greater connection (to the music).

I will say this much, for classical, I prefer digital. The surface noise of vinyl really distracts from the music.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Couldnt agree with you more Mike, took me sometime with classical , preferred Digital originally, but as you say , i have some classical better on LP than CD, My recording of Carmina Burana is better on LP than CD (Telarc)



Regards..
 
rbbert said:
And who even tries to disagree with the fact that the best an analog tape source can manage for noise is -75-80 dB, and very few machines manage that.
Click to expand...

And to quote the late, great HP, "the absence of noise is not the presence of music."

I just really wish people could spend one hour talking to Allen Sides, who possibly has the most experience with both mediums, and realize the difference between theory and digital reality. I predict that one hour will end up being three hours because most people will have their eyes opened to the wool being pulled over their eyes.
 
Mike said:
I love all my sources. On some my digital spanks my vinyl. On some albums, it's the opposite. Throw the R2R in the mix and all hell lets loose. I like my digital for convenience and my analog for a greater connection (to the music).

I will say this much, for classical, I prefer digital. The surface noise of vinyl really distracts from the music.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

And I can't listen to digital strings nor listen past the missing tonal and spatial information. OTOH most, with a few exceptions, new classical recordings have very little spatial information. One really needs to go back and listen the classical recordings done by Mercury, RCA, Decca, EMI, Harmonia Mundi, Erato, Nonesuch, Connoisseur Society, etc. YMMV.
 
still-one said:
God this analog loving mindset just never quiets down.
Click to expand...

On the contrary - it could I think be persuasively argued that the emphasis on Audioshark is far more heavily tilted towards digital systems , posts and discussions than analog.
 
Myles B. Astor said:
And I can't listen to digital strings nor listen past the missing tonal and spatial information. OTOH most, with a few exceptions, new classical recordings have very little spatial information. One really needs to go back and listen the classical recordings done by Mercury, RCA, Decca, EMI, Harmonia Mundi, Erato, Nonesuch, Connoisseur Society, etc. YMMV.
Click to expand...


A big +1 here for Myles! My classical vinyl from the 50's and 60's will spank any new or old digital classical recordings. The harmonic resolution and resonance of cello, bass, viola, violin is so full and 3 dimentional on my vinyl playback, that it makes digital sound like cardboard in comparison. It truly is amazing how right they got it back then with "old technology". The majority of my old vinyl is extremely quiet with nary a tick or pop as well, and when it does happen....it's not intrusive to my ears or should I say is easily forgiven by my ears as the harmonic truth is so great that one does not want to give it up. Unlike what a lot of the new releases are like coming out nowadays.

Best wishes,
No Regrets
 
Myles, I'm as aware as anyone (which I suspect really includes most of us here) about the differences between digital theory and digital reality. I think that narrowing that difference is where most of the effective advancements in digital storage technology occur. It's just as obvious to me as it is to others that if digital reality equaled digital theory the CD would sound much better than it does. Nevertheless, for my sonic priorities good digital systems sound better than similar LP systems, and I accept that for yours the opposite is true.
 
I think that what is ultimately most important is that one enjoys listening to music on his or hers equipment, whether it be digital or vinyl, sand or glass, etc, etc. I can enjoy listening to my digital front end too, but when I toss on one of my many vintage lp's, whether it be classical or jazz it just has more breath, more harmonics, more aliveness and realness to the presentation.

If you look closely in my moniker photo, you can see my cello off in the corner of my music room. I've had friends ask me to play along with both digital and vinyl recordings and my cello blends so nicely with the vinyl recordings, but stands out way and above when playing along with the digital. The digital cannot fool you into believing the recording is a real presence in the room as much as good vinyl. So when I am listening in a critical sense for the utmost musical enjoyment, I always turn to my vinyl.
 
I'm of the thought that the recording and mastering process makes more difference that the the format. I listen to my Lumin around 80% of the time. Some albums are amazingly true to life, others make my ears bleed.

My vinyl setup will never leave my house, I absolutely love it! As long as I can enjoy music from both formats, I'm happy.

I just love listening to music. I've never understood the ongoing war between the two camps. Just sit back and enjoy whatever you like.

It's like talking about politics, you're never going to change someone else's mind. And that's why we don't talk about it here, all it does is divide us.
 
Last edited:
Well I must be one of those trendy people referred to earlier. All I can say is that I am wrapping up a long journey where I have tried to assess whether I go analog or digital as the first (maybe only) source in my new system. I spent a bit of time considering what I thought is sota digital (take a peek at some of the Lampi threads). After finally having a chance to really a/b things over several hours with the best gear under one roof I came to a clear conclusion (for me). I know, I know show conditions are imperfect and I am a knucklehead for even going, but I feel if you can collect a data sample with enough data points conclusions can be drawn. I went to the show with every expectation of giving Lampi an order but it wasn't right for me.

I am by no means as eloquent as many of you at describing these things. I simply found even the best digital has a bite, a hard edge that I did not find in analog. It did not seem as natural to me. I felt as if I always had a tight muscle some where in my neck while listening to digital that just went away when the vinyl was played.

Is it expectation bias? Maybe.

Is there something that never gets re-connected in the time domain when square waves are reproduced from bits and bites no matter the accuracy, resolution or the perfection the clocks? Maybe.

I guess for now it really is moot as I know what I like and obviously many others on this thread on both sides do as well. Ain't it great?
 
Paul - wait, what? You're a music lover and not an audiophile? Shame! LOL.

Did you get to hear the Harbeth's? I bet you would love those, a pair of sweet tube amps and a killer vinyl rig, then sit back and laugh at us arguing over which USB cable sounds the best, which speaker has the hardest material (because harness = better sound didn't you know) or discussing the latest flavor of the month DAC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Myles B. Astor said:
The Dave Brubeck MQA Take Five demo was horrible. I have a 2nd Gen 15 ips tape given to me by a friend for my birthday and any similarity between the tape and MQA was purely coicidental. So bad I couldn't believe the source WAS the tape. The cymbals were hard as nails and may have been worse than 80s digital. The rest of the music spectrum was totally discontinuous. Where was the midrange? And the instruments were MIA. WTF? YMMV.. Totally a gimmick and it's all really about streaming and compacting data in the end if I read between the lines.
Click to expand...

Myles, I heard MQA a couple of weeks ago at a Meridian event in Mountain View. The demo was on a "$100 Meridian System" and in a second room with headphones. All of the sample music was MQA decoded only - no chance to hear the original tracks or to hear MQA encoded music without the decoder on.

I also heard Time Out and found it much poorer sounding than the Stereo DSD Download and Stereo SACD of "Time Out" that I have at home - a setup much less than $100K in cost.

Also of note, Meridian's marketing folks in Mountain View were highly focusing on MQA's ability to transmit music on streaming systems using "CD Quality or less" bandwidth. So it appears to be more of a product aimed at the streaming market vs. competing with today's high resolution formats like 24/96 PCM downloads, SACD and DSD downloads.
 
MDP said:
I'm of the thought that the recording and mastering process makes more difference that the the format. I listen to my Lumin around 80% of the time. Some albums are amazingly true to life, others make my ears bleed.

My vinyl setup will never leave my house, I absolutely love it! As long as I can enjoy music from both formats, I'm happy.

I just love listening to music. I've never understood the ongoing war between the two camps. Just sit back and enjoy whatever you like.

It's like talking about politics, you're never going to change someone else's mind. And that's why we don't talk about it here, all it does is divide us.
Click to expand...

Of course the hall/studio, mikes, miking, recording equipment, etc. makes a huge difference. The hall maybe accounts for 80% of the sound of say a classical recording. But let's go with all things being equal, the best example of each medium.
 
FlexibleAudio said:
Well I must be one of those trendy people referred to earlier. All I can say is that I am wrapping up a long journey where I have tried to assess whether I go analog or digital as the first (maybe only) source in my new system. I spent a bit of time considering what I thought is sota digital (take a peek at some of the Lampi threads). After finally having a chance to really a/b things over several hours with the best gear under one roof I came to a clear conclusion (for me). I know, I know show conditions are imperfect and I am a knucklehead for even going, but I feel if you can collect a data sample with enough data points conclusions can be drawn. I went to the show with every expectation of giving Lampi an order but it wasn't right for me.
Click to expand...

Why limit yourself if you can afford both...especially if you have a limited vinyl collection?

I really think you should resolve to get the best of both that you can afford. I dont blame you for not calling now, as you smell trouble. I would definitley talk you into both and definitely no danger of me convincing you with my phobia of long written epistles. LoL
 
wisnon said:
Why limit yourself if you can afford both...especially if you have a limited vinyl collection?

I really think you should resolve to get the best of both that you can afford. I dont blame you for not calling now, as you smell trouble. I would definitley talk you into both and definitely no danger of me convincing you with my phobia of long written epistles. LoL
Click to expand...


Thanks Norman. If you have seen one thing from me it would be that I want to develop my system with as little compromise as possible (to my ears) and that I move at the speed of a crippled snail. Oh wait, that's two things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top