View Full Version : Vinyl or digital?
My system has been in a sort of tug of war for sometime between the 2 and which one sounds better. Since adding the Anthem preamp the cd playback is so much like the vinyl I quickly lose interest in the whole vinyl ritual. My expectations for vinyl are very high and I think it should always blow the cd away.
What do you guys think?
My expectations for vinyl are very high and I think it should always blow the cd away.
Agreed. :)
But it doesn't always work out that way. I got so disillusioned with my LP12 sounding worse than my Denon 2900 that the LP12 found itself on ebay. I'd owned it for 18years too.
Sand Dancin Donkey Walker
27-08-2008, 15:28
My system has been in a sort of tug of war for sometime between the 2 and which one sounds better. Since adding the Anthem preamp the cd playback is so much like the vinyl I quickly lose interest in the whole vinyl ritual. My expectations for vinyl are very high and I think it should always blow the cd away.
What do you guys think?
Hi KMair
There is a place for both CD and Vinyl within a music system, enjoy them both for what they each do in their own special way. A bit of a 'Sit on the fence' reply but as MIke ( Shian7 ) knows I do equally enjoy both.
Andy - SDDW
It depends very much on the quality of the digital and vinyl set-ups (or sources) in question.
Experience so far, over many years, tells me that vinyl done well (and it often isn't, though) wipes the floor with digital of any description, although computers have raised the bar now with the streaming of FLACs, etc, through a good DAC.
I should add that "vinyl done well" as far as I'm concerned means a top-notch T/T, immaculately set-up, playing mint well-recorded vinyl through a superb tube phono stage. With a suitable recording my modified SL-1210 wipes the floor with my Sony CDP & DAC, and they're about as 'analogue' sounding as digital gets.
I still use them equally, though, and enjoy them both for what they do. Sometimes convenience wins the day though and I can't be arsed getting up every 15 or 20 minutes to change over a record, so it's CD for those occasions. Overall though I am very much a valves & vinyl man :smoking:
Marco.
P.S What’s your first name?
StanleyB
27-08-2008, 15:49
I got a lovely Micro Seiki DDX-1000 with all the trimmings and with some bits lovingly refurbished by John (Thru). A large assortment of arms are also part of the package. But together with my transformed Ariston RD40 they just form part of the hifi furniture. I might plug the mains plug in one day...
In the mean time I find it more convenient to play CD or mp3. My hearing is about 12/15 so most of the vinyl ambience are now out of ears range...
I love music and really don't obsess over the gear to play it, but it drives me mad when you add something to your system which essentially makes you relearn your favorite albulms. However I do believe in ensuring proper turntable setup etc.
I just told my friend and dealer that using my old reciever for a pre was an obvious mistake. It most definitely got in the way of the source. You do what you must when funds are limited. The saying that ignorance is "bliss" is very true regarding music and gear.
StanleyB
27-08-2008, 16:05
I played Hotel California for more than 3 decades on a turntable only. Last week I finally bought the CD. Absolutely fantastic, and sounds better than the now worn out groves of the LP...
Is your first name secret or something? ;)
We do ask that our members sign their posts with their proper first name. It saves referring to you as "KMair" and makes for a more friendly, personal discussion.
So what is it, Kevin, Kyle or what? :)
Marco.
Thanks, Robert :)
Where does "K" and "Mair" come from then? My apologies if it's someone famous I haven't heard of! I'm presuming it's not you otherwise it would be RMair.
Marco.
I think there is room for both; for me a well set up turntable with decent arm and cart phono stage etc will still out perform digital, but most of the music I listen is via digital and while it does not move me as much as analogue I still enjoy digital and guess that is the point to enjoy the music
I stole it from Kylie Minogue , actually from her dvd of the Light Years tour. Near the end of the song on the dvd she added "thank you for flying km air" and it sort of stuck in my head.
A true but funny story regarding her. She gets very little exposure in USA and I was only familiar with a couple of her songs. When the Fever albulm was released that was when I started hearing her music every where. At the time I was quite a completist when it came to collecting music and I set on the fence for awhile before deciding to commit to amassing her catalog. The first order I placed for 12" singles came in a huge box from a gentleman from New York. I will never forget rushing home from Post Office and the joy of listening to all that vinyl! It took 8 hours to play them all. Still play them regularly.
Cheers!
l
LOL. I had a feeling you were going to say Kylie (based on your avatar) but I couldn't get the "Mair" connection!
Nice tale :)
Marco.
Iain Sinclair
27-08-2008, 18:01
I'd say vinyl wins over CD in terms of sound quality, though I can listen to either format with pleasure. Also, some of my vinyl is fairly knackered, and the convenience of the CD format was just made for lazy sods like me.
I will never forget rushing home from Post Office and the joy of listening to all that vinyl! It took 8 hours to play them all.
8 hours of Kylie on the trot? Blimey...
niklasthedolphin
27-08-2008, 23:21
I use all sources I can get my hands on, both analog and digital.
When it comes to user-friendly, convenience and editing the digital is superior.
When it comes to the potential of sound quality the analog is superior.
But for determining the last, you will need the best R2R master tapes and the best 32/192 or DXD 24BIT/352.8kHz.
Most people don't have R2R.
Then LP from the best master recordings will have to replace them.
Anyway......................even the best cassette recordings on the best cassette recorders will be superior to any CD played on any CD player or any digital music for that matter.
"dolph"
For classical music I find that CD (and even more so SACD) is preferable to vinyl. For rock/pop etc. it's a close call and I'm happy to mix formats in a listening session.
Neil McCauley
28-08-2008, 00:12
The finest you say? The most musically engaging? Hmm - no contest gentlemen!
In pole position:
Peter McGrath's live orchestral uncompressed and unequalised recordings on his Nagra digital reel to reel tape machine. A rare and wonderful beast that Nagra is – and PG (Wilson Audio's director of sales) is a master of it.
Then ...
This is very closely followed by an experience Ricardo France-or-italy (Absolute Sounds)and I shared in the USA listening to a prototype and never released Krell DAT recorder/replay machine. Heartbreakingly wonderful. Uncle Dan saw that the writing was on the wall as far as DAT in the domestic arena was concerned.
Then ...
Any live BBC Radio 3 broadcast via my Trio KT917 FM tuner. Similarly with a Sequerra, heavyweight Sansui, or a Magnum Dynalab too I guess.
After that ...
A prototype DVD-A recording by Kostas Metaxas using his highly tuned Stellavox. He cracked it, and then no damn replay machines of worth.
The point being that sad to relate, the very finest sources are either now defunct, or getting that way. Moreover the majority of 'civilians' have never heard and probably never will hear the sheer wonder, majesty and energy of these other sources. Such a shame. Bose, i-pod and DDB (digital done badly) - step this way please.
---//---
Since we seem to have drifted on to best recordings.
The best i've heard, bar none, was a couple of cassette tape recordings, done about 25 years ago, on a cheap Pioneer recorder.
Using a simple Sony stereo mic centrally placed six or eight feet from the jazz/blues band.
Not a perfectly balanced sound, but more realistic than anything else i've heard.
Don't know how the engineers manage to cock up something which could be quite simple.
Tony Moore
28-08-2008, 10:40
Reminds me also of a recording I once made of the choir that my Mum sings in. I had a Sony DAT walkman and the Sony mic to go with it and they asked me to attempt to record one of their concerts.
Acoustics were poor from where I was able to site the mike, lots of audience noise, etc. However the actual recording was amazing! Listened to through headphones it was as if you were there in person. The ambience was incredible. You could even tell how far away the choir were! And the echoes of the hall sounded so real. There must'be been a lot of phase and timing information that was there that is simply not available with a multi-mic recording, all mixed down and messed up.
Through speakers though it did sound a little thin and unimpressive so I can see why people would compress and push the loudness.
That DAT machine was good. Pity the head went. :(
Dave the bass
28-08-2008, 18:39
8 hours of Kylie on the trot? Blimey...
Blimey, 8 hours of Kylie... that takes me back. We were young and reckless and had the wind in our hair, we didn't care what people thought of us we were crazy...
... but she was so clingy..."Kylie!" I says to her "You gotta let me go, I ain't the marrying kind...we had our fun... let it go babe" ...
I felt mean at the time but hey, lifes like that innit!
Wonder what she's up to now?
*puts kettle on goes back to soldering*
:)
DTB
Beechwoods
31-08-2008, 21:32
I have been collecting live music for years and years and have consistently been amazed by the fantastic quality of some of the old 'bootleg' recordings; covert 'amateur' recordings done in less than ideal circumstances. My main thing has been Pink Floyd and some of the audience recordings from the mid-70's really have to be heard to be believed. A combination of both technology availability (DAT/solid state recording capability, and FLAC) and the internet - bittorrent especially - bringing collectors together has surfaced many of the old good recordings as truly excellent master transfers. But for all the excellence of the digital transfer and distribution, the marvel for me is the sound of the original analogue recordings. It's these that sent me down the path of collecting reel to reel machines, to be honest...
The recording that always makes me laugh when I hear it is one of the Floyd in 1969, Manchester Free Trade Hall. A fantastic show. I have a 1st Gen > DAT copy of this and it sounds great - perticularly for an audience recording of that vintage. The thing that makes me laugh is a few years ago I was lucky enough to get in touch with the guy who recorded it. He used an early Philips cassette deck, with stock mic (which had a pause button on it which he really liked so it got more than it's fair share of use) and 2 tapes. One of which was the demo tape that came with the tape recorder.
His view was that it was the PA that made it sound so good - he'd never heard better - and they were in the right seats, row 'B'... so maybe in terms of capturing the essence of a live recording, it's not a question of analogue versus digital and more one of simple serendipity :)
Experience so far, over many years, tells me that vinyl done well (and it often isn't, though) wipes the floor with digital of any description, although computers have raised the bar now with the streaming of FLACs, etc, through a good DAC.
Yes thats all well and good but what is most often the source of the FLAC file
A digital CD or a digitised record
If I remember the Free Trade Hall had a terrible acoustics, I think I saw
The Who there ; they were loud, of course, but the hall made it unbearably so
Yes thats all well and good but what is most often the source of the FLAC file
A digital CD or a digitised record
I said that they had raised the bar (in terms of what digital can do); I didn't say it was better than vinyl.
Marco.
Peter Stockwell
01-09-2008, 10:53
I played Hotel California for more than 3 decades on a turntable only. Last week I finally bought the CD. Absolutely fantastic, and sounds better than the now worn out groves of the LP...
Yikes! I have a CD of this and it sounds downright awful, or it did the last time I listened to it. Do you have a new reissue or summat ?
I also have a good recording of this on CD. Stan, try buying a new audiophile pressing of the album on 180g virgin vinyl from the likes of Diverse or Stamford and see what you think then ;)
Marco.
Peter Stockwell
01-09-2008, 10:59
I said that they had raised the bar (in terms of what digital can do); I didn't say it was better than vinyl.
Marco.
Stan's Dac was scary good with Was (not Was) after listening to the same album on the SL1210/PS1200. I've obviously got more work to do with set-up. I'd dialled in the VTF and VTA for the non PS1200'd SL1210 and since the noise floor has gone down on the TT I'm having to re-adjust to get a balance that I enjoy. "Love over Gold", "Going for the One" were both excellent to frighteningly good. A Don Henley album (perfect beast ?) was a bit too incisive, but perhaps it's a pressing that can't be saved ?
More tweaking tonight, if I have time.
cheers
That's half the fun with vinyl, Peter - you can optimise the sound to your own preference, within certain parameters. You take what you get with digital - and often it ain't much worth having!
I'm referring to recording quality here not the performance of any particular DACs.
Of course quite a lot of vinyl these days is far from perfect but at least you can tweak the sound to make it passable. If a CD sounds shit - it sounds shit and that's it, same with downloads.
Marco.
Peter Stockwell
01-09-2008, 13:11
If a CD sounds shit - it sounds shit and that's it, same with downloads.
Marco.
Nowadays I think the position is more nuanced. Downloads, I think is WYSIWYG. (WYHIWYG?) CDs ? it might just be possible that a rip of a dodgy CD sounds way better than reading the same CD in realtime. I've not tried this, but's a possibility, given that when ripping a CD to hard disk the software can check and recheck to make sure the bits is bits and the pits is pits (1's and 0's).
cheers
Neil McCauley
01-09-2008, 23:15
I think I saw The Who there ; they were loud, of course, but the hall made it unbearably so
Saw The Who at Manchester University Union in 1969. So loud that quite literally, if you were not in close proximity to other members of the audience, your sense of balance was compromised i.e it was hard to walk upright in a straight line! I got a small puncture in my left eardrum from the volume at that gig. In the subsequent 16 gigs, other than the opening of The Rainbow (Finsbury Park) , I never saw them play better. It was a few nights before the Live at Leeds Gig.
---//---
The loudest gig I ever been to Yngwie Malmsteen at the Marquee only gig i heard people shouting turn it down and this was at a metal gig. There is a great Ted Nugent story of people complaining about noise lveels 15miles away and a pigion flying pass decency prevents me saying what happened to the pigion when hit by that volume of sound No wonder Pete and Ted are nearly death
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.