kzhtoo
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2014
- Messages
- 1,615
You are making me running out of excuse. lol Thanks, that sounds like a plan. Maybe this is the year I'll finally have a TT.
What about $5K package deal?
Vinyl vs CD - according to KEF
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
You are making me running out of excuse. lol Thanks, that sounds like a plan. Maybe this is the year I'll finally have a TT.
What about $5K package deal?
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,109
I thought Mike just put together a package deal for you. It's everything you need to get up and spin some vinyl.
Albert
New member
That's about what mine cost for everything used. The Lenco L-75 with the heavy plinth and ADA MG-1 air bearing tonearm cost $3500, Denon DL-103R about $350, Jeff Rowland phono amp about $1000 and Audience Au24 SE low z phono cable about $500. That's $5350 so it's close. I feel no urge to upgrade, except maybe the cartridge some day.
still-one
Active member
I am aware that you know my general position regarding analog and digital. The reason I occasionally insert a post in one of these threads is to remind you that just because you and all of the other analog acolytes believe in the supremacy of vinyl does not make it a fact. I have no issue with anyone who prefers listening to vinyl over digital. It's just a preference. Now saying there must be something wrong with my analog set-up, or for that matter every vinyl set-up I have ever heard, that they were all broken. That is a bit pompous.
groovy
New member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2014
- Messages
- 189
I suspect if one were to conduct a study, large sampling of people and recordings, comparing the two formats, you would find many instances where the two were indistinguishable (cd vs hi-res would certainly affect these numbers), some where vinyl clearly trumps digital, and, dare I say, nil where digital trumps vinyl. Granted, there are many pressings of the same album w/ varying degrees of sound quality, but, well.... so I'm assuming clean quite vinyl, and the best sounding versions of each, head to head, and the study to be conducted w/ the help of kickstarter in the near future in fantasy land. lol.
And for the first comparison, I would put The Doors 45 ap reissues up against any digital version. nuff said.
And maybe for a cherry on top, an R/L Led Zeppelin II (near mint)...
And for the first comparison, I would put The Doors 45 ap reissues up against any digital version. nuff said.
And maybe for a cherry on top, an R/L Led Zeppelin II (near mint)...
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,109
So call me pompous. I have been called lots worse.
Doesn't change the fact that I would love to hear your vinyl rig vs. your digital rig to determine whether I agree with you that your digital sounds better than your vinyl or if you just have digital ears. What cartridge do you have.
still-one
Active member
So call me pompous. I have been called lots worse.
My current cartridge is nothing special. I am using a Micro Benz Ruby.
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,109
Still a nice cartridge. .3mv output may be less than an ideal match for your PH 8.
GreyMouse
New member
How important is this matching? I have an ARC SP20, with the same 58db as the PH 8 (and generally similar sonics, according to many). The new Linn Krystal MC cart outputs .25mv and sounded very good with my dealer's SP 20/Ref 75se the other day. I wouldn't debate that maybe my hearing isn't sophisticated enough to detect the problems (dynamics?), but my dealer who I trust agreed it sounded even better than an AMG setup we compared.
Sorry to hijack the thread a bit. My experience is analog brings that elusive emotional connection more consistently than digital.
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,109
If you don't enough gain for a low output MC cartridge, noise can become an issue along with muted dynamic range. I think .25mv output is pushing it for the SP-20 as well. As long as you are happy with the sound, that is what matters at the end of the day.
atmasphere
Active member
Agreed.
What does seem to make the supremacy of vinyl a fact is that decades after the CD was introduced, vinyl is going quite strong! All the pressing plants in the US are 6 months backed up; all the mastering houses are busy. The year of the least vinyl production was 1993 (or 1992 depending on who you talk to) and its been on the rise ever since. Now its so common you can get it at Target.
The labels trying to quit LP production in the 80s and 90s proved to be an example of an industry trying to resist market forces.
It is the market talking and its not us audiophiles! We don't affect the market- the kids do. The point is if the LP were really and truly inferior, it would be long gone, like side valves in an automobile engine. IOW superior technology as a way of displacing inferior or outmoded technology. Since that hasn't happened, its a safe assumption that the LP technology is in fact not inferior.
This is not hard to understand- Redbook specs were developed at a time when the Apple 2 was the ultra hot-shot computer! I've not seen one of them in 30 years. People were still programming with switches and punchcards (remember the Altair?).
Like many things in audio, the newer technology was not ready for prime time when it got pressed into service, and further the motivation by the industry was not higher performance but lower cost. So it should be no surprise at all that vinyl continues on, and likely will for many years because its not a trend.
***************************
I do take some umbrage with some comments made in the article:
Frequency response: LP has much wider bandwidth, able to go from about 15 Hz to over 30KHz even on a cheap system
Dynamic Range: Lacquers cut on a mastering lathe are so quiet that the noise floor is literally the noise of the playback system. This means that they rival Redbook. The noise comes in during the pressing process, but plants like QRP (Acoustic Sounds) have made dramatic strides to reduce that by eliminating vibration in their pressing machines. As a result we don't know at this time what is ultimately possible.
When we master LPs, we rarely do any compression or limiting. Its not necessary. Its a good idea with digital though, if for no other reason than its likely to be played in a car.
I've heard plenty of CDs that out perform vinyl, but by and large in my experience, vinyl is the more listenable format. There's a rightness I only find occasionally in CDs. That's not a scientific observation by any means. But all I know is that since returning to vinyl I'm really jazzed by the listening experience which nowadays is long and joyous. Do I still enjoy CDs? Sure do--they keep getting better as well.