My Recent Digital vs Analog Experience

N

nicoff

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
2,368
My analog front end is a VPI classic, Benz Ace Cartridge, and Nova II phono preamp.

My current digital front end is Roon/HQPlayer/T+A DAC8 DSD.

I believe that price wise both front ends are equivalent. (about $5k).

However, You do need a computer to run Roon and HQPlayer but most people already own one.

My Recent experience: The sound coming out of the digital front end is outstanding. The analog was always my reference but now my digital tops my analog.

My conclusion is that dollar for dollar, if all you want to spend is $5k for a front end, digital gives you better value and sound.

Today I do not know where the dollar threshold would be when analog can sound better than digital. But not too long ago, it was easy for a relatively cheap analog front end to beat digital products costing much more.

Times are changing.
 
nicoff said:
My analog front end is a VPI classic, Benz Ace Cartridge, and Nova II phono preamp.

My current digital front end is Roon/HQPlayer/T+A DAC8 DSD.

I believe that price wise both front ends are equivalent. (about $5k).

However, You do need a computer to run Roon and HQPlayer but most people already own one.

My Recent experience: The sound coming out of the digital front end is outstanding. The analog was always my reference but now my digital tops my analog.

My conclusion is that dollar for dollar, if all you want to spend is $5k for a front end, digital gives you better value and sound.

Today I do not know where the dollar threshold would be when analog can sound better than digital. But not too long ago, it was easy for a relatively cheap analog front end to beat digital products costing much more.

Times are changing.
Click to expand...

That’s great to hear. You have two excellent sources. Were you able to compare the same recordings by chance? Was there something specific that stood out for you as to why one was better than the other?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike said:
That’s great to hear. You have two excellent sources. Were you able to compare the same recordings by chance? Was there something specific that stood out for you as to why one was better than the other?


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

Yes I compared several recordings the digital and analog versions. Different genres as well. The digital version was: more dynamic, sound was cleaner (that's aside from ticks and pops), more details in vocals, better detail in instruments.

I am upsampling everything to DSD512. The sound feels 'analog', not fatiguing at all.

I will be listening less to LPs. That's for sure.
 
vortrex said:
$5k can get you a very good DAC. $5k won't get you much in a turntable, let alone a turntable/arm/cartridge/pre.
Click to expand...

I agree. And that is why I demurred how much would someone have to invest in an analog set up to match the $5k digital front end I described.
So, if it takes $20k or whatever in an analog set up to match a $5k digital set up, I for one and probably others will be thinking why bother.
 
Don’t forget digital offers incredible flexibility, and reliability, over analog. With digital you can either listen to an album, or make playlists of favorite songs, or genres. No longer will you accidentally ruin an album, or break a stylus. Those days are over.

Welcome to the real world. :)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fqP1Aj79nWU
 
nicoff said:
I agree. And that is why I demurred how much would someone have to invest in an analog set up to match the $5k digital front end I described.
So, if it takes $20k or whatever in an analog set up to match a $5k digital set up, I for one and probably others will be thinking why bother.
Click to expand...

That's right. I love the super expensive turntables of my friends (we're talking north of $ 50k incl. phonostage) and admire them -- how the hell can something have such incredibly precise mechanics to get so much info out of that little groove? But I honestly don't think they have much of an edge over my $ 6.5k CD replay setup. Someone else may feel differently.

And you have all the inconvenience. I would never go back to vinyl in my own system.
 
nicoff said:
Yes I compared several recordings the digital and analog versions. Different genres as well. The digital version was: more dynamic, sound was cleaner (that's aside from ticks and pops), more details in vocals, better detail in instruments.
Click to expand...
Yup, as you should with lower noise and higher dynamic range http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=6234
Plus my protracted ritual consists on press Power, click Play, become immersed (literally) in music, a virtual reality of the concert halls I've attended. Concert halls whose reality doesn't include clicks, pops, rumble, flutter, constricted dynamic range, spatially deprived studio constructed stereophony, etc, etc.

The vinylphiles must still be asleep :P
 
AJ Soundfield said:
Yup, as you should with lower noise and higher dynamic range http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=6234
Plus my protracted ritual consists on press Power, click Play, become immersed (literally) in music, a virtual reality of the concert halls I've attended. Concert halls whose reality doesn't include clicks, pops, rumble, flutter, constricted dynamic range, spatially deprived studio constructed stereophony, etc, etc.

The vinylphiles must still be asleep :P
Click to expand...
Maybe because we were up so late listening to our glorious vinyl! :audiophile:
 
AJ Soundfield said:
Yup, as you should with lower noise and higher dynamic range http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=6234
Plus my protracted ritual consists on press Power, click Play, become immersed (literally) in music, a virtual reality of the concert halls I've attended. Concert halls whose reality doesn't include clicks, pops, rumble, flutter, constricted dynamic range, spatially deprived studio constructed stereophony, etc, etc.

The vinylphiles must still be asleep :P
Click to expand...

From your link:

And it doesn’t really matter whether you consume these recordings from vinyl LPs or CDs. The dynamic range of an actual performance isn’t maintained from recording sessions to distribution format. Yes, the potential of PCM digital to maintain every dynamic nuance present during the original performance is there. But it is almost never realized. The music business doesn’t want their releases to have real world dynamics
 
mep said:
From your link:

And it doesn’t really matter whether you consume these recordings from vinyl LPs or CDs. The dynamic range of an actual performance isn’t maintained from recording sessions to distribution format. Yes, the potential of PCM digital to maintain every dynamic nuance present during the original performance is there. Butit is almost never realized. The music business doesn’t want their releases to have real world dynamics
Click to expand...
Yep, thanks.
 
Let me just add that to my ears the upsampling and conversion to DSD512 make regular CDs and Tidal (16/44) sound just as good as the pricier hi-rez without spending any extra money on Hi Rez downloads.
 
My analog front end is a VPI classic 3, Audio Technica ART 7, and Esoteric E03 phono preamp.

My current digital front end is Mark Levinson N°360S + Grimm CC1 + Marantz SA7S1....
I can affirm that my VPI has a better sound than my CD player. There is no doubt.

That's why I have bought an Esoteric K03XS, I listen it with the Grimm CC1 and I can say that with the K03XS, the ML 360S has another sound...
 
nicoff said:
Yes I compared several recordings the digital and analog versions. Different genres as well. The digital version was: more dynamic, sound was cleaner (that's aside from ticks and pops), more details in vocals, better detail in instruments.

I am upsampling everything to DSD512. The sound feels 'analog', not fatiguing at all.

I will be listening less to LPs. That's for sure.
Click to expand...


Very difficult when comparing same recordings , if originally a digital recording it will sound better than the analog LP and if originally an analog pressings will be worse in digital. The EQ necessary for Analog reproduction and mastering is a big contributor to the difference.
 
a.wayne said:
Very difficult when comparing same recordings , if originally a digital recording it will sound better than the analog LP and if originally an analog pressings will be worse in digital. The EQ necessary for Analog reproduction and mastering is a big contributor to the difference.
Click to expand...

I was careful about choosing the recordings. I was playing LPs from the 70s and 80s. Those were analog recordings. I compared them to the CDs from those albums.
 
nicoff said:
I was careful about choosing the recordings. I was playing LPs from the 70s and 80s. Those were analog recordings. I compared them to the CDs from those albums.
Click to expand...

Seems a fair comparison.

Another thing that I noticed: While there are stellar orchestral and piano recordings on vinyl, I have not yet heard a string quartet recording on my friends' turntables that is as realistic to my ears as high quality digital recordings of string quartets that I have. It seems to be something in the older analog or miking process that added coloration and masked fine transient information. I was disappointed about the sound quality on CD of Mozart string quartets played by the Alban Berg Quartet in the 1970s (love their interpretation). I thought perhaps it was a bad digital transfer, but then I heard the same type of coloration from string quartets on LP, recorded in the same time period. There are though some older analog recordings of solo violin that are excellent.

In any case, when it comes to string quartets, I'll take digital over vinyl any day.
 
I should add that the Janaki Trio Debut on Yarlung Records can sound excellent on LP. That is a modern recording of a string trio (the LP is from analog tape I believe, the CD is a digital recording), but it is still not a string quartet.
 
I dunno ,

Dont view them mutually exclusive at all and with plenty of exposure with both at all levels of the spectrum , including but not limited to the actual recording process and mastering of both , analog gives up nothing to digital except for convenience and storage. It does take a bigger effort to get by top digital today , but mostly because most TT systems are poorly setup and configured to begin with , not many pay attn to stylus profiles necessary for certain recordings from different era’s and how important SUT or Phono Pre’s quality are , yet i understand fully why most cant be bothered and its old knowledge to get them done correctly..


To compare an HD digital file to less than a direct master LP is not a proper comparison IMO ...



regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top