Good analog and good digital converge?

[Pharos]

The technical limitations of vinyl are readily apparent, and far inferior to those of the best digital - they do not need to be stated.

Convergence is inevitable if both are improving, and they will meet - at the never to be reached - perfection.

But, the ear has evolved with its brain hearing mechanical sounds from all of its environment, and those sounds with their harmonics are all related to mechanical structures which follow specific mathematical laws.

The mechanical failures of records also follow these laws.

However digital distortions and errors have mathematical relationships which are extremely different from these, and are alien to the whole of the human evolutionary ear-brain development. (jitter, aliasing noise and many others).

This I argue is surely why such can be so offensive even when at levels which would be considered benign in analogue sound reproduction.

[magiccarpetride]

This.

If I had a dollar for each milestone I've reached and told myself "whew, finally I'm here, no more chasing the dragon!"

[Clive]

If I had a dollar for each milestone I've reached and told myself "whew, finally I'm here, no more chasing the dragon!"

Why not instead say to yourself "I'm close enough, I'll chill and enjoy the music"?

[struth]

Why not instead say to yourself "I'm close enough, I'll chill and enjoy the music"?

Ive been finished for a long time tbh. I know it could be better but I enjoy the sound it makes and that's enough now. Tried this and that but on my budget what I have now is probably better than it should be

[magiccarpetride]

Why not instead say to yourself "I'm close enough, I'll chill and enjoy the music"?

If I had a dollar for each milestone I've reached and told myself "I'm close enough, I'll chill and enjoy the music"

[Jimbo]

But when the vinyl is cut it goes through a digital/analogue convertor? And if the recording was made on a digital recorder to begin with? The analohue purity is ruined before it even gets to you.

Now if we talk recordings and records cut completely pre digital (and even pre-solid state) then yes, I agree they have something a 'perfect' digital recording does not have. But we are well into the realms of subjectivism and in operational terms, multiple possibilities of cause there. Maybe that is the proof of the analogue purity theory. I'm guessing not, I may be wrong.

But if you want to be truly purist analogue it is reel to reel you want, not vinyl

It is not the digital recording that is the problem, and yes most post 1980 vinyl is from a digital master. It is the ability of our domestic equipment (DACs) to unravel this information and allow us to hear what was recorded without screwing it up. Remember a turntable is not a DAC and that step is crucial when playing back digital recordings on vinyl. It is when you use a DAC to reconstruct the digital information where it all goes horribly wrong.

Now think back to the early days of digital music and CD players used as the main piece of equipment for playing digital music - the sound was abhorrent, it was shockingly bad. I know I had many players and they were awful.

Wind forward 30 years or more and listen to some of the same CD material ripped to a file and played back via the best DACs available and we are light years ahead in sound quality. Why, because DACs have improved and all the associated equipment. Digital music has now become listenable and many find it their preferred way of listening to music. But the reason I believe that Digital music has become listenable is because it now sounds a little closer to analogue.

I have not heard every DAC on the planet by any means but I can tell you I have heard Chords DAVE DAC and Blu2 M-scaler and this combination is truly entering the analogue realm and to some extent beyond. And this is a system that plays back those original CD recordings either via CD player via m-scaler or as a file based rip. Nothing has changed with the recording. It is simply far better reconstructed in the analogue realm.

Vinyl plays back digital recordings effortlessly in its ability to reproduce the sound in analogue. Digital equipment still struggles IMHO apart from a very few exceptional cases.

[Jimbo]

The technical limitations of vinyl are readily apparent, and far inferior to those of the best digital - they do not need to be stated.

Convergence is inevitable if both are improving, and they will meet - at the never to be reached - perfection.

But, the ear has evolved with its brain hearing mechanical sounds from all of its environment, and those sounds with their harmonics are all related to mechanical structures which follow specific mathematical laws.

The mechanical failures of records also follow these laws.

However digital distortions and errors have mathematical relationships which are extremely different from these, and are alien to the whole of the human evolutionary ear-brain development. (jitter, aliasing noise and many others).

This I argue is surely why such can be so offensive even when at levels which would be considered benign in analogue sound reproduction.

Spot on Dennis.

[jandl100]

I'm glad I'm an old codger and can't hear all the awful things that digital music does.
I can certainly hear the limitations of vinyl playback, though.

I was in a music shop a few years ago and a guy was saying he couldn't bear to listen to CDs because of the constant high pitch whistle.
Go figure.

[Gazjam]

It is not the digital recording that is the problem, and yes most post 1980 vinyl is from a digital master. It is the ability of our domestic equipment (DACs) to unravel this information and allow us to hear what was recorded without screwing it up. Remember a turntable is not a DAC and that step is crucial when playing back digital recordings on vinyl. It is when you use a DAC to reconstruct the digital information where it all goes horribly wrong.

Now think back to the early days of digital music and CD players used as the main piece of equipment for playing digital music - the sound was abhorrent, it was shockingly bad. I know I had many players and they were awful.

Wind forward 30 years or more and listen to some of the same CD material ripped to a file and played back via the best DACs available and we are light years ahead in sound quality. Why, because DACs have improved and all the associated equipment. Digital music has now become listenable and many find it their preferred way of listening to music. But the reason I believe that Digital music has become listenable is because it now sounds a little closer to analogue.

I have not heard every DAC on the planet by any means but I can tell you I have heard Chords DAVE DAC and Blu2 M-scaler and this combination is truly entering the analogue realm and to some extent beyond. And this is a system that plays back those original CD recordings either via CD player via m-scaler or as a file based rip. Nothing has changed with the recording. It is simply far better reconstructed in the analogue realm.

Vinyl plays back digital recordings effortlessly in its ability to reproduce the sound in analogue. Digital equipment still struggles IMHO apart from a very few exceptional cases.

Great post James,
I agree, theres some magic in digital recordings that modern Dacs like the Dave can reveal.
Listen to the same recording on different dacs and they can sound very different.

Different ways to do it of course,
Different dac chips, different implimentations and design philospphies.
My own Dac converts everything you plug into it to 10x DSD, then lowpass filters that through an output transformer, not a traditional analogue output stage.

DCS, Berkley systems, Bricasti, PS Audio and others all have different approaches to digital, so I dont really believe in the classic ‘one or the other’ vinyl vs digital argument anymore, I can enjoy both whist them not being the same.

And why not?

[Clive]

If I had a dollar for each milestone I've reached and told myself "I'm close enough, I'll chill and enjoy the music"

Alex, if you had all those dollars you could have paid for the therapy.