View Full Version : Digital vs. LP
Been pondering this. Of course I've heard well set up digital systems as well as vinyl systems - both of which can sound incredible.
However what I have not experienced is a well set up digital source within the same system of a well set up vinyl source. That is using the same downstream items (preamp, amp, speakers).
Does anyone have such a system and if so what opinions of the resultant sounds?
Edward
Sent via Tapatalk
Been pondering this. Of course I've heard well set up digital systems as well as vinyl systems - both of which can sound incredible.
However what I have not experienced is a well set up digital source within the same system of a well set up vinyl source. That is using the same downstream items (preamp, amp, speakers).
Does anyone have such a system and if so what opinions of the resultant sounds?
I do. The vinyl front-end cost more than the digital front-end, partly because I bought the latter secondhand and the former new, but they are in the same ball park.
In my experience, the two are more or less on a par; good digital recordings sound great, and good vinyl recordings sound great too. Less-good recordings in both formats sound, well, less good. I only have a few recordings in both formats, so it's difficult to compare like with like, but providing the vinyl is in reasonable condition (and some of my vinyl records are knackered through over-playing on cheap systems) and the digital version hasn't been monkeyed about with too much, the differences between the formats are minimal.
Ali Tait
07-09-2017, 13:51
Would agree with this, though a new phono stage coming soon may change my mind..
Since getting a Mytek dac and now using Roon and Tidal, my digital front end has come on leaps and bounds, and certainly rivals the vinyl front end.
Thanks Joe, very interesting and your opinion that the differences are minimal. Of course the actual recording/mastering will make a huge difference. I've got a lot of digital stuff which was remastered during the so called 'loudness wars' where dynamic range compression was used making a lot of music I enjoyed in my vinyl days simply unplayable on CD. And then of course there will be lots of vinyl that will be badly pressed (or knackered as you point out).
A lot or the vinyl vs digital debate will be due to the many variables that creep in - so good to hear that you consider the differences minimal. What is your set up by the way?
Then there is the debate between Redbook vs. hirez. :) For me I detect a worthwhile difference between redbook and 24/96 but higher than that (say 24/192) I can't detect differences.
Would agree with this, though a new phono stage coming soon may change my mind..
Since getting a Mytek dac and now using Roon and Tidal, my digital front end has come on leaps and bounds, and certainly rivals the vinyl front end.
I wonder how much our perception of differences in sound is caused by our money investment in hifi equipment and upgrades? I'm always reminding myself that I'm just as vulnerable, probably more so, as others in respect of expectation bias.
Been pondering this. Of course I've heard well set up digital systems as well as vinyl systems - both of which can sound incredible.
However what I have not experienced is a well set up digital source within the same system of a well set up vinyl source. That is using the same downstream items (preamp, amp, speakers).
Does anyone have such a system and if so what opinions of the resultant sounds?
Edward
Hi Edward,
In short, yes, I have such a system and my views on the subject are well documented in the archive. Best have a search to save me repeating myself again, on a subject that's been discussed here many, many times.
However, if you have any specific questions on the matter, I'll endeavour to answer them to the best of my ability :)
Marco.
Hi Edward,
In short, yes, I have such a system and my views on the subject are well documented in the archive. Best have a search to save me repeating myself again, on a subject that's been discussed here many, many times :)
Marco.
Woo - you have set me a massive task there Marco - searching through your 71k messages. :lol:
No you are right - I ought to have done some searches first. But I'm gonna take a wild guess here, judging from your signature, you think vinyl is heavenly and digital is the spawn of the devil. :eyebrows: Just joshing here btw. I'll have a look more deeply.
Ali Tait
07-09-2017, 14:38
I wonder how much our perception of differences in sound is caused by our money investment in hifi equipment and upgrades? I'm always reminding myself that I'm just as vulnerable, probably more so, as others in respect of expectation bias.
Not much in my case I like to think, most of my kit is secondhand and/or tweaked/ fettled by myself. Would be fairly even expectation in any case, since my cartridge and my dac are two items I bought new and are about the same retail price.
Woo - you have set me a massive task there Marco - searching through your 71k messages. :lol:
No you are right - I ought to have done some searches first. But I'm gonna take a wild guess here, judging from your signature, you think vinyl is heavenly and digital is the spawn of the devil. :eyebrows: Just joshing here btw. I'll have a look more deeply.
you must have missed ...
Audiocom-modified Sony X-777ES/DAS-R1 transport/DAC. Raspberry Pi-3 Model B and IQaudio Pi-DAC+/Paul Hynes SR3DR-05 linear PSU/Williams Audio NAS linear PSU. lol few bobs worth there if he didnt like digi
RobbieGong
07-09-2017, 14:44
I'll ad mi tuppence worth :lol:
In my experience (for what it's worth) both can be very good as it's music after all.
I've played tunes extensively via both.
I settled with the Pioneer PD91 in terms of cd because as well as being a gorgeous piece of kit, it is regarded for having an 'analogue' presentation ie: not so hard/glassy digital sounding as can be the case.
It's a great cdp, however it doesn't get a look in be honest as my vinyl replay is what I always find myself reaching for, it just moves me in a way the digital as good as it is doesnt.
Originally Posted by Edwardlon View Post
I wonder how much our perception of differences in sound is caused by our money investment in hifi equipment and upgrades? I'm always reminding myself that I'm just as vulnerable, probably more so, as others in respect of expectation bias.
Not much in my case I like to think, most of my kit is secondhand and/or tweaked/ fettled by myself. Would be fairly even expectation in any case, since my cartridge and my dac are two items I bought new and are about the same retail price.
thats a good observation, and in some cases maybe true, although many will be honest enough to know when it sounds crap, even if it did cost a grand or more.
Ive been trying to go more digital and enjoy it but keep returning to the black stuff. Think this time I have inadvertently managed it by breaking my cart collection. Had a few moments when ive been frustrated but overall I am getting there.
If I continue to manage it once its been fettled by the man later in year, i will have the choice again, or I guess if I dont want it any more I can move it. My digital isnt expensive but it sounds pretty good to me.
Ali Tait
07-09-2017, 14:51
What are you having fettled Grant?
speedracer
07-09-2017, 15:18
I have been trying to play more CD's recently, mind you it does help that I have only recently bought a good CD player! I have always been a vinyl guy & love the ritual of playing records, so my system has always been heavily record biased, tinkered a couple of times in the past with digital but not a fair comparison when my CDP's have cost a fraction of the vinyl setup. I have heard digital sound very good, & of course very bad, but the physical media does nothing for me & I just cannot get excited about playing CD's, I feel detached rather than connected & I am not sure why but there it is. The CDP is still only a small investment compared to my turntables/phono stage, but I am getting there, very slowly.
What are you having fettled Grant?
Marco is going to do my tt.. I kinda had an accident lol. Just trying Tidal on trial.. first song. sounds pretty good although the interface is a bit lacking compared to spotify imo.
Ali Tait
07-09-2017, 15:30
Try playing through Roon on free trial.
Try playing through Roon on free trial.
a bit pricey for me am afraid at moment. Give this a run for a month anyway. Will see how much i like it (I knew I shouldnt lol) as its quite addictive. Spotify are trialling hifi mode too so that might suit me better. Missing the remote already
Hi Edward,
In short, yes, I have such a system and my views on the subject are well documented in the archive. Best have a search to save me repeating myself again, on a subject that's been discussed here many, many times.
However, if you have any specific questions on the matter, I'll endeavour to answer them to the best of my ability :)
Marco.
Woo - you have set me a massive task there Marco - searching through your 71k messages. :lol:
No you are right - I ought to have done some searches first. But I'm gonna take a wild guess here, judging from your signature, you think vinyl is heavenly and digital is the spawn of the devil. :eyebrows: Just joshing here btw. I'll have a look more deeply.
So I had a look Marco and found many instances of your views. I guess this thread (http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?8575-AAD-vs-DDD-CD-test) summarises your opinion and I agree with you. It comes down to how the stuff was recorded and in an all digital world lots is lost in terms of sheer musicality/ambience. But capturing the analogue sound in an analogue manner, even when eventually presented digitally can/will sound superb. This is consistent with some vinyl rips I did years ago using Cool Edit Pro (wow that takes me back) which sounded far far better than the remastered cds then available. An example that comes to mind was the Yes album 90125. Chalk and cheese.
I'm gonna check out the Electribe 101 album now. :)
Ali Tait
07-09-2017, 16:18
a bit pricey for me am afraid at moment. Give this a run for a month anyway. Will see how much i like it (I knew I shouldnt lol) as its quite addictive. Spotify are trialling hifi mode too so that might suit me better. Missing the remote already
Yeah but you can try Roon free too. :-)
Yeah but you can try Roon free too. :-)
Does Roon provide a streaming service like Spotify and Tidal or is it only a way of just streaming local media?
I was, a few weeks back, gonna give Roon a try but discovered that I would have to give my credit/debit card details upfront and then have to remember to cancel after the initial free period. Not something I like doing so I discussed with Roon. They said I could have an extended trial (but still would have to sign up). So far as I can make out Roon has licencing issues with their metadata providers which prevent them giving trials without the credit/debit card details thing.
Do you find Roon gives better quality sound then other players? I use JRiver but am attracted to the way Roon handles metadata and its displays etc.
Just to clarify; when I comment on the 'digital' side of things, I mean Red Book CDs only. I've tinkered a bit with hi-res stuff, but not enough to be able to comment usefully on its merits.
Yeah but you can try Roon free too. :-)
Already cancelled Tidal. Get 30 days out of it tho. Interface is shockingly poor for a £20 a month service. Sound quality is better although part of that is the output from it is higher than norm. Found spotify's one to be very good with free remote within the app being a big plus, but its way more stable too. Sound quality is not as good but pretty decent for mp3.
Think I will hold out for Spotify's hifi service. although Ive no idea when it will be online, but it is in beta at moment.
Just to clarify; when I comment on the 'digital' side of things, I mean Red Book CDs only. I've tinkered a bit with hi-res stuff, but not enough to be able to comment usefully on its merits.
Ive never bothered with hi rez, although I have and still do upscale with jriver as I think its better(i accept i may be kidding myself but Whats the harm)
Ive never bothered with hi rez, although I have and still do upscale with jriver as I think its better(i accept i may be kidding myself but Whats the harm)
I downloaded some hi-res stuff from Linn Records a couple of years back; didn't hear anything so good it made me want to investigate further. Every time I read articles or forum discussions on the subject it makes my head hurt, even when such discussions are preceded by the words 'I'll keep this really simple ...'.
But capturing the analogue sound in an analogue manner, even when eventually presented digitally can/will sound superb. This is consistent with some vinyl rips I did years ago using Cool Edit Pro (wow that takes me back) which sounded far far better than the remastered cds then available. An example that comes to mind was the Yes album 90125. Chalk and cheese.
:)
Different mastering = Different sound. Mastering makes a lot more difference than the format, assuming the sources and system are good to begin with. Differences in mastering also account for the supposed superiority of 'high resolution' digital.
But we have been here many times before so I'll shut up now.
But we have been here many times before so I'll shut up now.
Ah but some of us are just new kids on the block .... :)
Always read your posts with interest Martin.
Always read your posts with interest Martin.
Don't worry, it's just a phase and it'll pass ;)
Differences in mastering also account for the supposed superiority of 'high resolution' digital.
In *some* instances, yes, but in my experience, not always. Remember to take into consideration those 'grey areas' you were pulling Jez up for yesterday! ;)
I'll get back to you later, Edward :)
Marco.
Ali Tait
07-09-2017, 18:51
Does Roon provide a streaming service like Spotify and Tidal or is it only a way of just streaming local media?
I was, a few weeks back, gonna give Roon a try but discovered that I would have to give my credit/debit card details upfront and then have to remember to cancel after the initial free period. Not something I like doing so I discussed with Roon. They said I could have an extended trial (but still would have to sign up). So far as I can make out Roon has licencing issues with their metadata providers which prevent them giving trials without the credit/debit card details thing.
Do you find Roon gives better quality sound then other players? I use JRiver but am attracted to the way Roon handles metadata and its displays etc.
It will stream your local media, but I've found the likes of Tidal not only has a better interface through it, but sounds better too. I used to use Jriver, but find Roon superior.
WESTLOWER
07-09-2017, 19:05
Edward, we spoke in a round about way on this when we met recently.
My vinyl and digital front ends are very fulfilling and
Hit the spots in many ways, with the right material.
I have to say if I hadn't been a compulsive jazz record collector for 30 years
I wouldn't go the vinyl route today if I was starting out from scratch.
I decided a while ago to invest in my analogue front end to enjoy the fruits of My record collection by purchasing an lp 12 (tin hat at the ready:rolleyes:) which
I have a stupid emotional attachment to and obviously a financial one too now!!
But with the purchase of a top quality NOS DAC the digital presentation has been a revelation.
I owe you a return visit so I'll organise a get together soon and
You can judge for yourself. I think both are imho top notch...
But I will agree with most in saying it's very much
Material dependent in both formats digital and analogue.
I have many duplicate recording on both formats so comparisons are doable..
You can't polish a turd no matter which format it's presented in! :lol:
But when it's right, oh my, they are both so sweet!
Using the same downstream components will highlight the differences between vinyl and digital for sure but if care is taken in selection of equipment the differences can be lessened. It all depends on how good you want your vinyl and digital to be, how much money you have to fund equipment and what sound you are looking for.
Trying to get them to sound very similar will be difficult and time consuming and maybe expensive. I personally would concentrate on getting a vinyl system you enjoy listening too sorted and then put together a digital system you feel satisfies your listening pleasure. I would not fuss too much on trying to get them exactly the same because you won't. Digital and vinyl inherently sound different, each having their own strengths and I would concentrate on these and enjoy them.
You will also find a digital version of an LP release may sound very different and therefore trying to match systems is even more difficult because amongst other things the mastering for each medium can be very different.
If you are going down the digital route I would forget CD. File based digital audio is really the only realistic close alternative to LPs. There are some fairly cheap options out there to do this but again the more money you throw at it the more musical satisfaction you can get. In my experience vinyl LPs do this easily. Digital is a bit more tricky.
If you are going down the digital route I would forget CD. File based digital audio is really the only realistic close alternative to LPs. There are some fairly cheap options out there to do this but again the more money you throw at it the more musical satisfaction you can get. In my experience vinyl LPs do this easily. Digital is a bit more tricky.
That's interesting thing you say about playing cds, a few years ago my lps and cds sounded very similar with the lp replay system costing 8 x the price of the cd set up
But over the last 5 years I have made some decent improvements to my amps and speakers, the result is now a big difference between sources...the CD player and old fashioned cds sounding far more lifelike and those lps hardly being played
That's interesting thing you say about playing cds, a few years ago my lps and cds sounded very similar with the lp replay system costing 8 x the price of the cd set up
But over the last 5 years I have made some decent improvements to my amps and speakers, the result is now a big difference between sources...the CD player and old fashioned cds sounding far more lifelike and those lps hardly being played
No matter how much money I could throw at amps and speakers I am sure they would not make my CDs sound more lifelike than my vinyl. Just not possible with my CDP or any other I have heard. But file based audio is a different matter.
No matter how much money I could throw at amps and speakers I am sure they would not make my CDs sound more lifelike than my vinyl. Just not possible with my CDP or any other I have heard.
What about the Chord DAC you loved, fronted by a decent CD transport, Jim - have you tried that?
But file based audio is a different matter.
Well, yes and no. Experience tells me that FBA beats *most* CDPs, but the truly top-notch ones still sound better than *most* FBA set-ups. With FBA, it's all about how noise is dealt with, and crucially how it manifests itself on the music signal, as computers are inherently noisy things. That's what costs the money to get right! ;)
CD players/transports aren't as noisy (in that respect), especially those fitted with quality regulated linear PSUs, instead of SMPS.
Therefore, often in the battle of 'FBA vs CDP', it's a case of which of the respective sources best deals with their inherent weaknesses; in terms of FBA, that's noise, and with CDPs and transports, it's how accurately their respective mechanisms read the data encoded on discs, thus address the limitations of that physical disc-reading interface, and how it impacts on the sound.
That's why when the *best* CD players/transports get that bit right (or as right as possible), any such limitations are outweighed by how less noisy they are than most FBA set-ups, especially if they have a top-notch DAC on board. Again, I'll demonstrate all of this when you visit :)
Marco.
No matter how much money I could throw at amps and speakers I am sure they would not make my CDs sound more lifelike than my vinyl. Just not possible with my CDP or any other I have heard. But file based audio is a different matter.
The file thing is interesting the few lossless files I have sound very much like the CD I recorded them from.. But mp3 and the like there is a marked difference
Goes to show how different systems work. The opposite is true to me and it's easily demonstratable with cds .. its not a hunch
The Chord DAVE DAC now has a CD based front end called Blu Mk2 using m-scaler technology which is very good and certainly improves CD SQ significantly. This is due to the upscaling of the CD date before it reaches DAVE and the system can demonstrate easily between standard CD playback and upscaled. However file based ripped CD via the m-scaler and DAVE still sounds better to my ears.
Agree there are lots of noise issues with FBA and the equipment used to deliver this audio format. However I would suggest there are just as many inherent noise problems with a spinning dics (CDP) even if it is delivered via an offboard DAC. They are just different noise issues and because of the problems of reading shiny discs with a laser etc they can't really compete with FBA. I am sure you are aware of the problems even though you have a modified CDP this cannot get round the error correction etc of reading a CD surely?
That's interesting thing you say about playing cds, a few years ago my lps and cds sounded very similar with the lp replay system costing 8 x the price of the cd set up
But over the last 5 years I have made some decent improvements to my amps and speakers, the result is now a big difference between sources...the CD player and old fashioned cds sounding far more lifelike and those lps hardly being played
Hi Steve,
That sounds to me more like you've successfully addressed an issue in your system that previously was limiting the performance of CD [perhaps you've now worked on/spent more on the line stage of your amplifier, than on your phono stage and/or the associated circuitry responsible for optimising vinyl replay?] than the existence of inherent flaws in your vinyl set up...
Perhaps that's why CD replay has moved ahead, and your speakers are now simply revealing that fact?
Maybe the balance would be redressed if you upgraded your phono stage, or if you're still using MC cartridges with a valve MM stage, the associated SUT or head amp?
In my experience with vinyl replay, so much information is lost/distortion introduced at the critical signal amplification stage [and MUSIC lost with it], once it leaves the cartridge, and my guess is that there's a bottleneck present in that area of your system, which is currently preventing you from hearing what your vinyl front end is capable of.
I've been in the same situation myself in the past, and that's how I went about resolving it. Just a thought, mate! :)
Marco.
The Chord DAVE DAC now has a CD based front end called the m-scaler which is very good and certainly improves CD SQ significantly. This is due to the upscaling of the CD date before it reaches DAVE and the system can demonstrate easily between standard CD playback and upscaled. However file based ripped CD via the m-scaler and DAVE still sounds better to my ears.
That's interesting. Firstly, you know that I'm not into up-scaling, as to my ears it introduces a sonic signature (as a by-product of the up-scaling process), which I don't consider is natural. However, we'll leave that aside for the moment.
It may be that the m-scaler simply isn't as good a product (or as good at its job) as the partnering DAVE DAC, or indeed as good a source as the file-based one you heard in conjunction with the DAVE?
Therefore, the inferiority of sound you heard with CD may have been down to that, rather than anything inherently wrong with using a CD transport to read the required data.
My point was simply to partner the DAVE DAC (if electrically compatible), with a bog-standard, but top-notch CD transport mechanism, such as those from Esoteric, featuring TEAC-based VRDS NEO mechs and massive regulated linear PSUs, then simply connecting the DAVE to one, via a top-notch digital coaxial cable - and using that as the test CD source.
The point is, that in my experience, the best transport mechs (such as above) reduce laser-reading errors to a non-issue, sonically, simply because they've been *so* well engineered, and therefore reduce those errors to something so small, as to be an insignificance - and coupled with a truly top-notch DAC, makes this form of digital replay pretty much unbeatable - but at considerable cost!!
However I would suggest there are just as many inherent noise problems with a spinning dics (CDP) even if it is delivered via an offboard DAC. They are just different noise issues...
Sure, but all I'm saying is that in my experience the noise created by computers, and associated with FBA, is more insidious and difficult to address - and when not properly addressed, more invasive on the music signal.
I am sure you are aware of the problems even though you have a modified CDP this cannot get round the error correction etc of reading a CD surely?
Absolutely. It doesn't get around that issue, it cannot, *but* as I've said, because of how accurate the transport mechanism is inside the Sony, sonically, it's a non-issue.
This is what a PROPER CD-only transport mech looks like, and is similar to what's inside my Sony: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=esoteric+Cd+transport,+vrds+neo&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjZ_NClq5XWAhXiIcAKHeNaD1IQsAQIRw&biw=1152&bih=622#imgrc=v3Nbg9BDN4sCOM:
Trust me, ONLY when you've heard CD reproduced via something like that (with a top-notch DAC), have you heard CD properly! ;)
Marco.
Hi Steve,
That sounds to me more like you've successfully addressed an issue in your system that previously was limiting the performance of CD [perhaps you've now worked on/spent more on the line stage of your amplifier, than on your phono stage and/or the associated circuitry responsible for optimising vinyl replay?] than the existence of inherent flaws in your vinyl set up...
Perhaps the balance would be redressed if you upgraded your phono stage, or if you're still using MC cartridges, the associated SUT or head amp?
In my experience with vinyl replay, so much information is lost/distortion introduced at the signal amplification stage, once it leaves the cartridge, and my guess is that there is a bottleneck present in that area, which is currently not allowing you to truly hear what your vinyl front end is capable of. I've been in the same situation myself in the past, and that's how I went about resolving it.
Just a thought, mate! :)
Marco.
Hi Marco the main differences since you last heard my set up a few nebo' s back is redesigned speakers, getting the bass to where I wanted it and loosing the horns, the last amp I built which you have heard was such an improvement on previous efforts, and that's when it put a magnifying glass on the sources...
A matching set of glass core tribute ironwork and a lot of power supply work separated the suprising amount modulation that is inherent in most amplifier designs. Totally transformed the sound of the amp as you have heard
Hi Steve,
Nice one, mate. I'm sure that your amp and speakers must now sound truly amazing, as indeed they did when they were 'worse' at NEBO! :eek:
However, that doesn't negate the point I made in my last post about 'redressing the balance' between how accurately the signal is being amplified from your cartridge, compared with that of your CD source.
For me, the only real explanation for why your CDs are now sounding so much better than your LPs is because, in terms of the above, with the improvements you've carried out to your gear, the balance has now been tipped in favour of your line stage, a fact which your speakers are now clearly revealing....
Spend some more dosh/time maxing out your phono stage and/or the circuitry inside your amp responsible for optimising your vinyl front end (if you are so inclined), and I predict that that situation will change! ;)
Marco.
That's interesting. Firstly, you know that I'm not into up-scaling, as to my ears it introduces a sonic signature (as a by-product of the up-scaling process), which I don't consider is natural. However, we'll leave that aside for the moment.
It may be that the m-scaler simply isn't as good a product (or as good at its job) as the partnering DAVE DAC, or indeed as good a source as the file-based one you heard in conjunction with the DAVE?
Therefore, the inferiority of sound you heard with CD may have been down to that, rather than anything inherently wrong with using a CD transport to read the required data.
My point was simply to partner the DAVE DAC (if electrically compatible), with a bog-standard, but top-notch CD transport mechanism, such as those from Esoteric, featuring TEAC-based VRDS NEO mechs and massive regulated linear PSUs, then simply connecting the DAVE to one, via a top-notch digital coaxial cable - and using that as the test CD source.
The point is, that in my experience, the best transport mechs (such as above) reduce laser-reading errors to a non-issue, sonically, simply because they've been *so* well engineered, and therefore reduce those errors to something so small, as to be an insignificance - and coupled with a truly top-notch DAC, makes this form of digital replay pretty much unbeatable - but at considerable cost!!
Sure, but all I'm saying is that in my experience the noise created by computers, and associated with FBA, is more insidious and difficult to address - and when not properly addressed, more invasive on the music signal.
Absolutely. It doesn't get around that issue, it cannot, *but* as I've said, because of how accurate the transport mechanism is inside the Sony, sonically, it's a non-issue.
This is what a PROPER CD-only transport mech looks like, and is similar to what's inside my Sony: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=esoteric+Cd+transport,+vrds+neo&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjZ_NClq5XWAhXiIcAKHeNaD1IQsAQIRw&biw=1152&bih=622#imgrc=v3Nbg9BDN4sCOM:
Trust me, ONLY when you've heard CD reproduced via something like that (with a top-notch DAC), have you heard CD properly! ;)
Marco.
I am sure you have optimised your CD to sound great in your system. What would be interesting to prove my point correct ( I may be wrong), would be hitch your CD player up to DAVE and A-B it against a file based version of the same recording. All would be revealed!:)
From my point of view I have heard some very expensive CD players and they are easily beaten by FBA. The Chord Blu 2 m-scaler does somewhat confuse the issue as it does significantly improve the sound of CD and its not subtle, but I feel this is the exception to the rule. Yes I agree upscaling sounds dodgy but done via the m-scaler into DAVE it is very good indeed.
I suppose it is worth pointing out that although both a cd and a turntable spin a disc and 'read' it, any similarity between how they work ends there.
The better the TT, arm and cartridge, the better the 'read' of the disc and this will transfer into perceived sound quality. This is not true of cd players. No matter how fancy and expensive the mech it will not read the disc any better that the transport on a £20 DVD player from Tesco. A cheap mech might potentially introduce noise to the signal due to vibration, and this may have an effect on sound quality, but it will not affect how accurately the disc is read.
In digital audio it really makes no difference whether the file is being read from an optical disc or a hard drive, this will have no effect on the accuracy of the read. yes the file is not being read in real time in the way a cd is read, this is why cd players have error correction. if there is a read error the error correction will sort it and you will get a perfect read. if the error correction fails you will get a drop out, or a nasty squeak or similar. it will be obvious. What you won't get is a slightly worse rendition of the music. it will either work perfectly or will not work at all.
Consequently there is no inherent benefit in terms of sound quality using file based audio compared to optical disc based audio.
of course there are many other things that will effect sound quality with digital audio. The design of the analogue output stage and the power supplies do seem to have a major effect, but this will apply to both CD players and a computer/DAC set up equally.
It is regrettable that the emphasis on improving digital replay seems to concentrate on things that don't make any difference to what we hear and little or no attention is paid to the things that do matter, mainly because they are not easily marketed to people with no understanding of how digital audio works, but that's commercial reality.
Regarding upsampling - upsampling a recording is not the same as playing back a recording that was originally recorded with mics able to capture frequencies up to 196khz (or whatever). Upsampling will change the perceived sound quality.
Note I say 'change' rather than improve. Whether you like the change is personal and subjective. I don't like it, for me it makes everything sound 'fluffy' and less defined. The important point is this should not be taken as evidence that so-called 'high resolution' recordings sound better because they contain frequencies beyond 22Khz (i.e the limit of human audibility) since it is not the same thing at all.
Ali Tait
08-09-2017, 12:15
I would like to hear how the new MQA encoded CD's sound. Who'd have thunk it, hi rez from CD..
MQA really needs to be killed with fire.
MQA really needs to be killed with fire.
Have you heard MQA?
Have you heard a file based system in your set up at home and compared it to your CD?
No matter how fancy and expensive the mech it will not read the disc any better that the transport on a £20 DVD player from Tesco. A cheap mech might potentially introduce noise to the signal due to vibration, and this may have an effect on sound quality, but it will not affect how accurately the disc is read.
It depends on what you mean by "read the disc any better"...
If you mean in terms of the accurate reading of noughts and ones, then no (providing that the error correction circuitry is functioning correctly), however, there's much more to it than that, if the most important thing of all is to be achieved: accurately reproducing the MUSIC contained on said disc!
So, if the cheap mech introduces noise to the signal, due to vibration, which I agree with, then why wouldn't one *specifically engineered* to combat that problem, not be better at the job, thus subsequently improve the SQ of the CD played?
For starters, think about why the very best transport mechs (such as VRDS NEO) are of an ALL METAL (as opposed to plastic) construction [and feature elaborate clamping systems], and what impact that might have on vibration... ;)
All of that ultimately comes under the category of 'reading the disc better'.
It's VIBRATION, which is the culprit here in terms of reduced fidelity, not the ability of the mech to accurately read noughts and ones! That's why, with any CDP, the quality of mech matters, and is hugely influential in the sound of CD, no matter how good the partnering DAC is.
if there is a read error the error correction will sort it and you will get a perfect read. if the error correction fails you will get a drop out, or a nasty squeak or similar. it will be obvious. What you won't get is a slightly worse rendition of the music. it will either work perfectly or will not work at all.
How do you know that for sure? Perhaps the error occurring may trigger a knock-on effect, further down the circuit, due to something that you haven't considered? The fact is, whilst what you say is in isolation technically correct, it may not be as simple as that. Hi-fi rarely is!
My view is that *every* aspect of reproducing the musical information, contained on discs, matters from start to finish of the process [including the efficacy of the disc-reading process], if you're going to hear it properly, and therefore get a proper rendition of the music. I just think you're a little guilty of simplistic (or perhaps wishful) thinking.
When something's not 100% right, at any point in that chain, it will almost always adversely affect signal integrity, the knock-on effect of which [reduced fidelity], could be heard by anyone with good ears and a decent system.
However, I completely agree with you about up-sampling, as I don't like the effects of the change, and hear it rather like you do.
Marco.
Firebottle
08-09-2017, 12:39
In digital audio it really makes no difference whether the file is being read from an optical disc or a hard drive, this will have no effect on the accuracy of the read. yes the file is not being read in real time in the way a cd is read, this is why cd players have error correction. if there is a read error the error correction will sort it and you will get a perfect read. if the error correction fails you will get a drop out, or a nasty squeak or similar. it will be obvious. What you won't get is a slightly worse rendition of the music. it will either work perfectly or will not work at all.
There does seem to be a widespread misapprehension that any form of 'error correction' is going to be audible. It's not like the audio waveform is being manipulated by addition or subtraction as the 'signal', or data to be more precise, is still a string of bits.
The string is either correct after any correction, or incorrect due to too many errors or missing bits; that's the only time it will become audibly corrupt, due to lack off (sufficient) error correction.
Have you heard MQA?
Have you heard a file based system in your set up at home and compared it to your CD?
No and no.
MQA is just taking the existing recording and improving the mastering and/or adding some judicious eq to spice it all up a bit, and making you pay for proprietary hardware and software in the process. Yes, this might make it sound subjectively 'better' but they could do that with the same recording on a normal CD or file if they wanted to. They don't because
1) There is a market for so called high resolution and they want a piece of it
2) There would be no way to copy protect the improved master if released on a normal 16/44.1 cd
I could set up a file based system in my home and compare it to some cd players but whatever I preferred , or whatever sounded better, it would have nothing to do with the manner in which the file is being read, and everything to do with the myriad of other differences in the set up.
Ali Tait
08-09-2017, 12:57
But it can be used to encode a hi rez file onto cd, not just upsample a Red Book recording-
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-encoded-cds-yes
Seems a pretty good idea to me.
I am sure you have optimised your CD to sound great in your system. What would be interesting to prove my point correct ( I may be wrong), would be hitch your CD player up to DAVE and A-B it against a file based version of the same recording. All would be revealed!:)
Indeed... Firstly, does DAVE have a digital coaxial input, to take the signal from the CDP? If not, then the 'game's a bogey'.
If it were possible, however, it would also be interesting comparing the Sony DAC with the DAVE, both using CD and a file-based sources, thus analysing the difference between old non-upsampling multi-bit technology,versus the 'best' of today's technology :)
From my point of view I have heard some very expensive CD players and they are easily beaten by FBA.
Cool, but that's where our experiences differ: some "very expensive CD players" I've heard beat FBA.
The Chord Blu 2 m-scaler does somewhat confuse the issue as it does significantly improve the sound of CD and its not subtle, but I feel this is the exception to the rule. Yes I agree upscaling sounds dodgy but done via the m-scaler into DAVE it is very good indeed.
I have no reason to doubt your ears, but to change my opinion on the matter, I'd need to hear it for myself, much as you need to do the same with what I'm claiming is possible with judiciously modified/optimised CDPs/DACs, built by Japanese majors, during the heyday of CD, when cost (to them) was no object...
Marco.
But it can be used to encode a hi rez file onto cd, not just upsample a Red Book recording-
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-encoded-cds-yes
Seems a pretty good idea to me.
It doesn't really do that, though. It essentially upsamples (i.e makes an educated guess at) the portion of the signal above 22Khz.
We already had full fat hi rez on a disc with DVD-A and that was fifteen years ago and it died a death because no-one wanted it.
I suppose it is worth pointing out that although both a cd and a turntable spin a disc and 'read' it, any similarity between how they work ends there.
The better the TT, arm and cartridge, the better the 'read' of the disc and this will transfer into perceived sound quality. This is not true of cd players. No matter how fancy and expensive the mech it will not read the disc any better that the transport on a £20 DVD player from Tesco. A cheap mech might potentially introduce noise to the signal due to vibration, and this may have an effect on sound quality, but it will not affect how accurately the disc is read.
In digital audio it really makes no difference whether the file is being read from an optical disc or a hard drive, this will have no effect on the accuracy of the read. yes the file is not being read in real time in the way a cd is read, this is why cd players have error correction. if there is a read error the error correction will sort it and you will get a perfect read. if the error correction fails you will get a drop out, or a nasty squeak or similar. it will be obvious. What you won't get is a slightly worse rendition of the music. it will either work perfectly or will not work at all.
Consequently there is no inherent benefit in terms of sound quality using file based audio compared to optical disc based audio.
of course there are many other things that will effect sound quality with digital audio. The design of the analogue output stage and the power supplies do seem to have a major effect, but this will apply to both CD players and a computer/DAC set up equally.
It is regrettable that the emphasis on improving digital replay seems to concentrate on things that don't make any difference to what we hear and little or no attention is paid to the things that do matter, mainly because they are not easily marketed to people with no understanding of how digital audio works, but that's commercial reality.
Regarding upsampling - upsampling a recording is not the same as playing back a recording that was originally recorded with mics able to capture frequencies up to 196khz (or whatever). Upsampling will change the perceived sound quality.
Note I say 'change' rather than improve. Whether you like the change is personal and subjective. I don't like it, for me it makes everything sound 'fluffy' and less defined. The important point is this should not be taken as evidence that so-called 'high resolution' recordings sound better because they contain frequencies beyond 22Khz (i.e the limit of human audibility) since it is not the same thing at all.
Error correction is quite clever. It's all byte blocks, parity bytes and interleaving. Whether it could cause some jitter I don't know but it is cleverly worked.
Cross Interleaved Reed Solomon Code or circ invented at mit
It doesn't really do that, though. It essentially upsamples (i.e makes an educated guess at) the portion of the signal above 22Khz.
We already had full fat hi rez on a disc with DVD-A and that was fifteen years ago and it died a death because no-one wanted it.
Wanna have a go at post #45, when you get a chance? ;)
Marco.
There does seem to be a widespread misapprehension that any form of 'error correction' is going to be audible. It's not like the audio waveform is being manipulated by addition or subtraction as the 'signal', or data to be more precise, is still a string of bits.
The string is either correct after any correction, or incorrect due to too many errors or missing bits; that's the only time it will become audibly corrupt, due to lack off (sufficient) error correction.
But if error correction kicks in it will cause deterioration in the audio signal hence FBA uses a cross referenced database to make sure all the bits are captured as they should be. Bit perfect audio is an essential starting point for high quality digital audio unlike CD which can be scratched or dirty causing error correction to occur thus inducing a poorer audio performance.
I suppose it is worth pointing out that although both a cd and a turntable spin a disc and 'read' it, any similarity between how they work ends there.
The better the TT, arm and cartridge, the better the 'read' of the disc and this will transfer into perceived sound quality. This is not true of cd players. No matter how fancy and expensive the mech it will not read the disc any better that the transport on a £20 DVD player from Tesco. A cheap mech might potentially introduce noise to the signal due to vibration, and this may have an effect on sound quality, but it will not affect how accurately the disc is read.
In digital audio it really makes no difference whether the file is being read from an optical disc or a hard drive, this will have no effect on the accuracy of the read. yes the file is not being read in real time in the way a cd is read, this is why cd players have error correction. if there is a read error the error correction will sort it and you will get a perfect read. if the error correction fails you will get a drop out, or a nasty squeak or similar. it will be obvious. What you won't get is a slightly worse rendition of the music. it will either work perfectly or will not work at all.
Consequently there is no inherent benefit in terms of sound quality using file based audio compared to optical disc based audio.
of course there are many other things that will effect sound quality with digital audio. The design of the analogue output stage and the power supplies do seem to have a major effect, but this will apply to both CD players and a computer/DAC set up equally.
It is regrettable that the emphasis on improving digital replay seems to concentrate on things that don't make any difference to what we hear and little or no attention is paid to the things that do matter, mainly because they are not easily marketed to people with no understanding of how digital audio works, but that's commercial reality.
Regarding upsampling - upsampling a recording is not the same as playing back a recording that was originally recorded with mics able to capture frequencies up to 196khz (or whatever). Upsampling will change the perceived sound quality.
Note I say 'change' rather than improve. Whether you like the change is personal and subjective. I don't like it, for me it makes everything sound 'fluffy' and less defined. The important point is this should not be taken as evidence that so-called 'high resolution' recordings sound better because they contain frequencies beyond 22Khz (i.e the limit of human audibility) since it is not the same thing at all.
Your theories on error correction are dubious. Error correction is not just a matter of it works or it doesn't. If it kicks in there will be a drop in SQ even if it doesn't sound like a nasty glitch.
File based Audio done properly negates this as it captures a bit perfect copy of the CD after cross referencing other data bases, usually in the order of 5. Of course downloaded files should already be bit perfect.
Also you cannot really compare a spinning CD disc to either a HDD or SSD. OK they both have problems but again CD is usually worse due to poor disc quality and then the horrors of the CDP circuitry!:):eek:
you realise hard drives use error correction too
Ali Tait
08-09-2017, 15:52
It doesn't really do that, though. It essentially upsamples (i.e makes an educated guess at) the portion of the signal above 22Khz.
We already had full fat hi rez on a disc with DVD-A and that was fifteen years ago and it died a death because no-one wanted it.
It's still a way of packing a high rez file into a smaller file. I have a Mytek dac so have made the comparisons, MQA does seem to make a lot of recordings sound better, certainly hasn't made any I've listened to any worse!
For FBA and downloads, seems a good idea to me, means smaller files to download and store.
Wanna have a go at post #45, when you get the chance? ;)
Marco.
Well we are agreeing regards transports are we not? Except perhaps that you are saying error correction may have an effect on the sound. I mean, never say never but if there is any way that this can happen I don't think there is anyone who is aware of what that might be.
Error correction is not just a matter of it works or it doesn't. If it kicks in there will be a drop in SQ even if it doesn't sound like a nasty glitch.
That's also my view. Applying rather simplistic 'black and white' thinking to hi-fi rarely works, as things are almost never that simple and much more complex! You have to think outside of the box and examine the less obvious, as well as the obvious.
I'm not a CDP designer, but I'd be very surprised if there was any 'free lunch', sonically, once error correction circuitry has kicked in.
The trick is to negate the error occurring in the first place and ensure that the integrity of the musical information, embedded on the disc, is maintained as far as possible throughout the reproduction process - and in that respect not all mechs are equal!
Marco.
That's also my view. Quite simply, applying 'black and white' thinking to hi-fi rarely works, as things are almost never that simple and much more complex! You have to think outside of the box and examine the less obvious, as well as the obvious.
Marco.
I have actually done the comparison between a 'dirty' old CD:eyebrows: and a new clean CD, a ripped version of the same CD and a CD burnt from a perfect file and there are interesting differences which are very audible. OK I know the ripped CD was FBA so that copy may not be a fair comparison but the laser read burnt CD from bit perfect file was the best!
Well we are agreeing regards transports are we not? Except perhaps that you are saying error correction may have an effect on the sound. I mean, never say never but if there is any way that this can happen I don't think there is anyone who is aware of what that might be.
See how I've replied to what Jim's written on the subject...
So are we agreeing then that there's rather more to faithfully reproducing the musical information contained on a CD, than simply the transport mech accurately reading the noughts and ones? :)
Marco.
Your theories on error correction are dubious. Error correction is not just a matter of it works or it doesn't. If it kicks in there will be a drop in SQ even if it doesn't sound like a nasty glitch.
:
This isn't 'my theory', it is actually how it works. If there is sound degradation other than a drop out, how does this manifest itself? If you have a link to something that elaborates on your claim about error correction please share.
Stratmangler
08-09-2017, 17:06
This isn't 'my theory', it is actually how it works. If there is sound degradation other than a drop out, how does this manifest itself? If you have a link to something that elaborates on your claim about error correction please share.
CD players use interpolation to correct for read errors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation
Read the definition very carefully.
CDPs will construct new data points to permit glitch free playback.
You rip a CD for FBA, and no interpolation takes place - you get the data read as it is, and if there are errors it results in a dropout on playback.
Which is why you're best advised to use a secure ripping tool.
The results are then compared to online databases, which verifies the disc by identifying the disc TOC (table of content).
CD players use interpolation to correct for read errors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation
Read the definition very carefully.
CDPs will construct new data points to permit glitch free playback.
You rip a CD for FBA, and no interpolation takes place - you get the data read as it is, and if there are errors it results in a dropout on playback.
Which is why you're best advised to use a secure ripping tool.
The results are then compared to online databases, which verifies the disc by identifying the disc TOC (table of content).
I am aware of that. But the waveform reconstructed by the error correction is identical to the actual waveform. If error correction is causing an issue it is not because of that.
This from Stereophile article (my bold) https://www.stereophile.com/content/cd-jitter-errors-magic-page-2
Fortunately, the CD format incorporates extremely powerful error detection and correction codes that can completely correct a burst error of up to 4000 successive bits. The reconstructed data are identical to what was missing.
So are we agreeing then that there's rather more to faithfully reproducing the musical information contained on a CD, than simply the transport mech accurately reading the noughts and ones? :)
Yoo-hoo, did you miss this? :popcorn: :popcorn:
;)
Marco.
Stratmangler
08-09-2017, 17:37
You can drill a tiny hole through a CD, and the disc will still play, and play without audible glitches - that's how strong the error correction is.
The data is interpolated from surrounding data, but the result of this specific instance of interpolation cannot ever be what was on the disc, because that part isn't there in the first place.
Thankfully most disc errors are of less significance, so the error correction doesn't have to make anything up.
If you really want to fuck your CDs up use your finger to spin the disc around in the jewel case - I had someone absent mindedly do that to one of my CDs while we were chatting.
And unfortunately it fucked the disc up.
Yoo-hoo, did you miss this? :popcorn: :popcorn:
;)
Marco.
Sorry, everyone is arguing with me all at once. Yes I completely agree there is more to CD replay than the transport reading noughts and ones (although they are not really noughts and ones). I don't recall saying otherwise.
I'm just trying to point out that some of the things that people think matter with digital replay, either don't matter at all or matter so little that they are swamped by other factors. The resolution of the recording beyond audibility for example, or the supposed issues with reading a file in real time. These things are nothing to do with why digital replay can sound shit!
You can drill a tiny hole through a CD, and the disc will still play, and play without audible glitches - that's how strong the error correction is.
The data is interpolated from surrounding data, but the result of this specific instance of interpolation cannot ever be what was on the disc, because that part isn't there in the first place.
Thankfully most disc errors are of less significance, so the error correction doesn't have to make anything up.
.
Ting is that it is being suggested that the error correction, although fixing the read error perfectly, will still audibly degrade the sound. So the violin will still play all the right notes at the right time but won't sound as good. What is your take on that?
So how does jitter fit into this picture? Not an error as such but a timing issue.
Is jitter more easily managed in a FBA system as compared to a CD based system?
Ting is that it is being suggested that the error correction, although fixing the read error perfectly, will still audibly degrade the sound. So the violin will still play all the right notes at the right time but won't sound as good. What is your take on that?
Of course, the only way to know from a subjectivist viewpoint is by a 'blind' comparison of an intact CD with one with a tiny hole drilled into it.
So how does jitter fit into this picture? Not an error as such but a timing issue.
Is jitter more easily managed in a FBA system as compared to a CD based system?
Think of the very best vinyl replay you ever heard.It was a wonderful sonic experience, yes? Then consider that that reproduction exhibited jitter that is order of magnitudes above what the cheapest supermarket DVD player will generate. Still think jitter is an issue?
Stratmangler
08-09-2017, 18:17
Ting is that it is being suggested that the error correction, although fixing the read error perfectly, will still audibly degrade the sound. So the violin will still play all the right notes at the right time but won't sound as good. What is your take on that?
In the extreme case I mentioned, it doesn't fix the read error perfectly - it works out likely figures and uses them. The estimation will be pretty close to what was there to start with, but it won't be the same as the original data.
There are lots of complex electromechanical things going on in a CDP - I wouldn't like to guess at what causes things to sound subjectively worse.
Power might be a good place to start.
There are lots of complex electromechanical things going on in a CDP - I wouldn't like to guess at what causes things to sound subjectively worse.
Power might be a good place to start.
Exactly.
I was going to do a thread when I got started but might as well mention it now. I have acquired a tame Double E who works as a Double E in the daytime and likes to do more Double E at night just for fun. And he is into music. I have two identical Sony players and I am going to get him to improve the power supplies in one of them. Comparison with the unmodded version will then follow.
25% of a cd is used for things like error retrieval The pattern blocks etc are not printed on cd in order or in line and this is how errors are easy to fix. Every data block has a total and if it doesn't then by addition or subtraction it will decipher what is missing correctly as there could normally only be one answer It's very clever. Whether this causes any probs sound wise I doubt but I'm no expert. The non linear batches of data ensure the majority of linear damage like scratches and dust don't bring the plane down
Arkless Electronics
08-09-2017, 18:37
Unless you are buying original pressings of LP's from years ago, virtually everything will have been digitally processed at some stage these days. I was reading a pro audio periodical I get sent FOC every month just today and thinking to myself that these is very little equipment being made new, now, that I could repair as it is all digital! There are even digital microphones being made and used now! There is still a huge demand for vintage analogue gear of course and there are companies making replicas, and even a few building new design analogue gear, but they are few and far between and considered niche stuff now....
In most cases new vinyl releases will have been recorded, mixed and mastered on digital gear... as will re-mastered classics like Bowie or Zeppelin etc...
Arkless Electronics
08-09-2017, 18:41
Exactly.
I was going to do a thread when I got started but might as well mention it now. I have acquired a tame Double E who works as a Double E in the daytime and likes to do more Double E at night just for fun. And he is into music. I have two identical Sony players and I am going to get him to improve the power supplies in one of them. Comparison with the unmodded version will then follow.
It's not an area I would pursue personally....
It's not an area I would pursue personally....
I may end up agreeing with you. But only after I try it.
Yep, power supply in all digital equipment from the NAS to the streamer, media player, CDP, DAC very significant. Linear probably the way to go in most cases but SMPS is 'quell horror ' found in some very good components so not to be discounted if done well.
Like Chris said I think, apart from error correction there are plenty of areas within CDPs that contribute nasty sonic noise or degrade the sound in some way.
I have been looking at some very carefully constructed (Not Expensive) digital systems recently which have been put together purely to isolate sonic nasties including rubbish coming down ethernet connections. The more that can be removed the better the sound. Obviously the problem with CD players was that the designers originally didn't know some of the stuff they were designing knackered the sound. And as Marco suggested FBA has problems of its own but I have listened carefully for a long time to a lot of file based equipment and configurations and they have all kicked the ass of CDP. I remember when a £1500 DAC put an end to a chaps £16000 CDP, he was not pleased but had to admit the truth in front of him or the truth of the sound he was listening too.
I have had the joy of comparing a lot of what I have heard with my vinyl system and I am never disappointed. Vinyl does great sound so easily in comparison.:) But even I have to admit the prospect of a digital system for me is getting closer as so much has been learnt over the last 10 years and now there is equipment out there that will deliver a decent sound for not too many bucks.
Yep, power supply in all digital equipment from the NAS to the streamer, media player, CDP, DAC very significant. Linear probably the way to go in most cases but SMPS is 'quell horror ' found in some very good components so not to be discounted if done well.
Like Chris said I think, apart from error correction there are plenty of areas within CDPs that contribute nasty sonic noise or degrade the sound in some way.
I have been looking at some very carefully constructed (Not Expensive) digital systems recently which have been put together purely to isolate sonic nasties including rubbish coming down ethernet connections. The more that can be removed the better the sound. Obviously the problem with CD players was that the designers originally didn't know some of the stuff they were designing knackered the sound. And as Marco suggested FBA has problems of its own but I have listened carefully for a long time to a lot of file based equipment and configurations and they have all kicked the ass of CDP. I remember when a £1500 DAC put an end to a chaps £16000 CDP, he was not pleased but had to admit the truth in front of him or the truth of the sound he was listening too.
I have had the joy of comparing a lot of what I have heard with my vinyl system and I am never disappointed. Vinyl does great sound so easily in comparison.:) But even I have to admit the prospect of a digital system for me is getting closer as so much has been learnt over the last 10 years and now there is equipment out there that will deliver a decent sound for not too many bucks.
I'm happy to admit that I have a dog in this race in that I really don't want to introduce a computer into my system and rip all my CDs. Now if I thought that would give me a significant upgrade in sound quality beyond what any transport/DAC or cd player could give me then I would do it. I'm just not seeing anything that inclines me to believe that is the case.
I can accept that in a one on one situation a file audio system sounded subjectively better than an expensive cd player, but to suggest that is proof that FBA is fundamentally better seems to be a leap of logic. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that it is not fundamentally better. I'm certainly not convinced by the error correction theory and there hasn't been a lot else put forward. But doing a proper, like for like, apples to apples subjective comparison to decide it is impossible. Too many variables. So the problem has to be looked at objectively. At least I think so.
Why not ask me which I listen to most, and why, between my streaming set up and my CD player? If you trust my judgement, it may shine some light on the conundrum you've outlined.... ;)
Marco.
Why not ask me which I listen to most, and why, between my streaming set up and my CD player? If you trust my judgement, it may shine some light on the conundrum you've outlined.... ;)
Marco.
Why not just say if it is relevant? ;) Yes, please do tell.
If you ain't using those Sonys anymore I will find a home for them. I remember the tape hiss on ZZ Top's First album. Effectively we were listening to the RTR machine that recorded the master, not a cd player.
FWIW to be honest nothing beats the listening experience to tell you if something sounds good or not. You can study digital audio infinitum via internet articles and forums but ultimately listening with your own ears is really the only way to pick your way through the technical worm holes created by all things digital. This is what i have done and not taken too much interest in the technicalities although I have read a great deal but arguing one system, piece of kit or method is better than another really means nothing until you have first hand experience.
I have been lucky and heard some great stuff and the evolution of really good digital audio but it reminds me of Digital photography, you know how it went 2mp camera then 4mp, 20mp. Then it was all about sensors etc finally we ended up with some amazing digital photographic equipment and thats just in a phone!
Similarly I have been following digital systems as they have evolved and some are just about there in my opinion of course.:) The learning curve has been steep, after all vinyl took about 60 years or more to get to a really great level of audio quality so I am not surprised digital has taken some time to mature and the techies have unravelled what is important and what needed to be fixed.
I am in the same boat as the OP and would like to put a system together that would be as good as or a match to my vinyl and hopefully soon I will but it certainly will not involve a CDP and will be File based probably with ROON running the software.
Ali Tait
08-09-2017, 20:17
That's where I am now with Roon and Tidal through a Mytek dac.
That's where I am now with Roon and Tidal through a Mytek dac.
I can imagine that a killer combination Ali.:)
Similarly I have been following digital systems as they have evolved and some are just about there in my opinion of course.:) The learning curve has been steep, after all vinyl took about 60 years or more to get to a really great level of audio quality so I am not surprised digital has taken some time to mature and the techies have unravelled what is important and what needed to be fixed.
.
But if this were true then old CD players and DACS like the Sony RS c0mbo Marco has, the Technics SLP1200 broadcast I used to have, would sound way off the pace now, but they don't. They are still quite astonishing in their ability to reveal the recording. Not saying there is not better now, but there is a limit to what can be achieved in terms of 'perfect' replay before we get beyond the replay technology and into tailoring the sound to subjective tastes, and IMO that limit was reached a long time ago.
Stratmangler
08-09-2017, 20:47
But if this were true then old CD players and DACS like the Sony RS c0mbo Marco has, the Technics SLP1200 broadcast I used to have, would sound way off the pace now, but they don't. They are still quite astonishing in their ability to reveal the recording. Not saying there is not better now, but there is a limit to what can be achieved in terms of 'perfect' replay before we get beyond the replay technology and into tailoring the sound to subjective tastes, and IMO that limit was reached a long time ago.
There probably isn't anything better now wrt CD replay.
Ali Tait
08-09-2017, 21:07
I can imagine that a killer combination Ali.:)
I'm happy with it, though a new phono stage coming next week might change my mind. :-)
But if this were true then old CD players and DACS like the Sony RS c0mbo Marco has, the Technics SLP1200 broadcast I used to have, would sound way off the pace now, but they don't. They are still quite astonishing in their ability to reveal the recording. Not saying there is not better now, but there is a limit to what can be achieved in terms of 'perfect' replay before we get beyond the replay technology and into tailoring the sound to subjective tastes, and IMO that limit was reached a long time ago.
Indeed... So far (I've yet to hear the Chord DAVE that Jim's raving about), I simply haven't experienced any significant sonic advances [note that this is different from technological advances in certain areas, which I agree have happened] from today's digital audio, compared with what I enjoy everyday from my 30-year old Sony combo, albeit upgraded in key areas with the best modern components.
I could probably make a small fortune alone, from selling all the (highly sought after and rare as hen's teeth now) Black Gate capacitors, which the DAC is chock-full of inside! ;)
Therefore, in short, the technological advances that have undoubtedly been made today, in certain areas of digital audio, haven't yet resulted in making the best of old technology sound fundamentally broken, which is what you're saying, and yes I agree.
I wonder, for example, whether Chord have taken as much trouble with the PSU arrangements inside the DAVE, and spent as much money on them, as they have on its up-sampling technology? And therefore, in essence, taking one step forward and two steps back, which in my experience is the case with a lot of new equipment (and speakers), simply because, unlike some of the 'statement' products from the likes of Sony, back in the day, the vast majority of is still built to a cost.
Perhaps that's a project for the next NEBO? Someone bring a Chord DAVE along and a partnering top-notch FBA source, and I'll bring my Sony CDP and DAC, and we'll play the same digitally mastered music (whether on CD or file) on the respective compatible devices, through the same system, and assess the results.
I, for one, would find such a comparison very interesting indeed, and possibly also rather enlightening....
Marco.
Why not just say if it is relevant? ;) Yes, please do tell.
If you ain't using those Sonys anymore I will find a home for them. I remember the tape hiss on ZZ Top's First album. Effectively we were listening to the RTR machine that recorded the master, not a cd player.
Lol... No, they're not going anywhere. If you read what I wrote earlier in one of my posts, you'll have seen a strong hint as to what is my ultimate preference, and it's still the Sonys. Now undoubtedly part of that is down to cost, in terms of how much money I've invested in them compared with my streaming source.
However, I can tell you that despite costing a fraction of my CDP and DAC, the RPi streaming/FBA set up still achieves around 90% of the performance of the Sonys, which provides an indication of how good it is in comparison, and that that final 10% or so of performance, with digital replay, is what costs most to obtain - and where the real magic lies.
I've also compared the RPi set up to considerably more expensive FBA sources/DACs, and not felt short changed by it, not only in my system but in others that are familiar, so it's not the case that I've simply not heard anything better, but of course that's not to say it doesn't exist.
For the meantime, however, my current digital benchmark is still my modified Sony CDP and DAC. However, that situation may change when I'll shortly get to hear a friend's Linn Klimax Renew DS, see here: http://dynamicheadroom.audio/gear-reviews/linn-klimax-review/ which he's raving about.
As ever, I remain openminded to embracing new technology that wholly and fundamentally leaves the Sonys for dead, so if or when that happens, you'll be amongst the first to know ;)
Marco.
The PSU and analogue output stage are all maxed out in DAVE with great care taken in every area to isolate noise and RFI. The full technical aspects of DAVE are extensive but for a simple account just check out the CHORD site. For a couple of days reading if you are that way inclined check out
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/
Rob Watts - DAVEs designer is very interactive on this Post. However no matter what is written the equipment needs to be listened too to really to appreciate what it does. I feel a lot of folks would be shocked if they were thinking it sounded like CD:)
I have mentioned DAVE as it is the best DAC I have ever heard but Hugo is also amazing and the Hugo TT. The only reason I have illustrated my thoughts on digital using DAVE as an example is because it fundamentally changed my views on what digital audio could achieve. I have heard some very expensive CD players put up against this device and frankly they just sound like CD. I have never heard some of the old school CD players Macca and Marco suggest are very good so I cannot comment on them but if they were so good why are they no longer manufactured or the companies manufacturing them producing something that good. Maybe its because many folk have moved away from CD and stream or use FBA but surely if there was an audiophile market still out there for these CDP they would still be sold?
DAVE is simply out of my budget but in the set up I have heard it is a benchmark for what can be achieved with digital audio currently and yes the Blu 2 and m-scaler technology does seem to keep CD alive. However even at a much more comfortable price level i.e. Hugo 2 via a file based system still easily surpasses CD in my book.
Other than good speakers and amps my biggest jump in sound quality (FBA system) was going from a well regarded Micromega MyDAC to a non oversampling Chevron DAC. This brought things to a much more organic sounding naturalness. I tried the Chord Dave at some show and whilst the sound was great I did have a feeling of 'meh'. But perhaps it was reverse bias in operation? I did not want such an expensive piece of kit to sound good? A DAC I did try a few months ago and was most impressed by was the RME ADI-2 (https://www.rme-audio.de/en/products/adi_2.php). This simply just got on with the job in hand in a very professional way - and far cheaper than the DAVE. So that or one of Chevron's latest DACs is probably next on my path to audio nirvana. I mulled over the idea of using a LPSU for the FBA kit but was apparently convinced it would make no difference. :)
The PSU and analogue output stage are all maxed out in DAVE with great care taken in every area to isolate noise and RFI.
Fair enough, but does it use SMPS, as opposed to regulated linear PSUs? If so, for me the jury's out, in terms of what influence that will have on its sound, and crucially how the noise SMPS units chuck onto the mains, affects other components sharing the same supply.
We've already had discussions on AoS where our resident EEs have confirmed that, although SMPS done well can be very good, it's still not going to as good as the BEST examples of the linear regulated variety.
I'm old school, and so believe that any truly great piece of hi-fi equipment starts with a a truly great (overspecced) regulated linear PSU, and that no compromises whatsoever should be made in that area, in order for said equipment to excel, sonically. The power supply is the beating heart of all hi-fi equipment! And so that's *always* where most of the money should be spent.
As Jez has touched upon recently, pretty soon regulated linear PSUs will be banned by the regs, so SMPS is the future, but ultimately, it is still a compromise, so for me that's where the best vintage equipment, which has been maxed out in that area, will always have an advantage.
I spent just over £2k on PSU modifications/re-clocking circuits, from Audiocom, to further max out an already overspecced PSU arrangement in the Sonys, which made an enormous difference to how they performed, so I *know* just how significant and influential PSU arrangements are in digital equipment.
Just so you know the cost of the Sonys (as I don't think I've mentioned it to you before), I paid just under £2k for them second hand, and so with the Audoicom mods, you're looking at just over £4k's worth of digital front end. It's not just some old tat I bought cheaply on ebay and have claimed as an unjustified 'giant-killer'. Trust me, it fully earns that title, as anyone who's heard it will confirm.
I have mentioned DAVE as it is the best DAC I have ever heard but Hugo is also amazing and the Hugo TT. The only reason I have illustrated my thoughts on digital using DAVE as an example is because it fundamentally changed my views on what digital audio could achieve. I have heard some very expensive CD players put up against this device and frankly they just sound like CD.
No problem, it's your current benchmark. I totally get that, and it's impressed you, so you're right to rave about it!
I have never heard some of the old school CD players Macca and Marco suggest are very good so I cannot comment on them but if they were so good why are they no longer manufactured or the companies manufacturing them producing something that good. Maybe its because many folk have moved away from CD and stream or use FBA but surely if there was an audiophile market still out there for these CDP they would still be sold?
Many reasons, but mostly cost. Quite simply, if the Sonys I've got were made today, they'd probably cost more to produce than the DAVE! The DAS-R1 DAC alone retailed for £1500, in 1989. How much would that equate to in today's money?
Aside from that, these things were built as 'cost no object' projects by huge companies like Sony, 'flexing their muscles' and showing the world just how good CD could sound. To build something similar today would be prohibitively expensive, particularly as Philips TDA 1541s are costly to implement optimally.
Also, as you've mentioned, the market just isn't there now for high-end CDPs, so when it comes to the X-777ES, almost no-one's building players now with proper CD-only transport mechs (such as the VRDS NEO I linked to earlier), and simply using cheap-as-chips (but grossly inferior) plastic DVD ROMs.
Therefore, as I said, it all comes down to cost and the fact that virtually no-one today would buy what it would take to produce a 'cost no object' CDP, in the way of the best ones from the heyday of CD, and when the major Jap players were building their very impressive 'statement' products, all based on optimising solid engineering principles, not on cost, convenience, miniaturisation, or creating the latest 'technology fad', to brainwash buyers into believing its the best, as is so much hi-fi equipment that's produced nowadays.
Marco.
Many reasons, but mostly cost. Quite simply, if the Sonys I've got were made today, they'd probably cost more to produce than the DAVE! The DAS-R1 DAC alone retailed for £1500, in 1989. How much would that equate to in today's money?
Not that much actually, on an adjusted-for-inflation basis £1,500 in 1987 equates to £3,425 today according to the Bank of England's inflation calculator. But of course high-end hifi prices have gone silly in the past few years, so I doubt it'd be sold at that level, as that wouldn't be 'statement' enough.
Take a read of this post which explains a little better than I could the PSU in DAVE. Just scroll down to Rob Watts explanation.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-270
Spectral Morn
09-09-2017, 11:06
Fair enough, but does it use SMPS, as opposed to regulated linear PSUs? If so, for me the jury's out, in terms of what influence that will have on its sound, and crucially how the noise SMPS units chuck onto the mains, affects other components sharing the same supply.
We've already had discussions on AoS where our resident EEs have confirmed that, although SMPS done well can be very good, it's still not going to as good as the BEST examples of the linear regulated variety.
I'm old school, and so believe that any truly great piece of hi-fi equipment starts with a a truly great (overspecced) regulated linear PSU, and that no compromises whatsoever should be made in that area, in order for said equipment to excel, sonically. The power supply is the beating heart of all hi-fi equipment! And so that's always where most of the money should be spent.
As Jez has touched upon recently, pretty soon regulated linear PSUs will be banned by the regs, so SMPS is the future, but ultimately, it is still a compromise, so for me that's where the best vintage equipment, which has been maxed out in that area, will always have an advantage.
I spent just over £2k on PSU modifications/re-clocking circuits, from Audiocom, to further max out an already overspecced PSU arrangement in the Sonys, which made an enormous difference to how they performed, so I *know* just how significant and influential PSU arrangements are in digital equipment.
Just so you know the cost of the Sonys (as I don't think I've mentioned it to you before), I paid just under £2k for them second hand, and so with the Audoicom mods, you're looking at just over £4k's worth of digital front end. It's not just some old tat I bought cheaply on ebay and have claimed as an unjustified 'giant-killer'. Trust me, it fully earns that title, as anyone who's heard it will confirm.
No problem, it's your current benchmark. I totally get that, and it's impressed you, so you're right to rave about it!
Many reasons, but mostly cost. Quite simply, if the Sonys I've got were made today, they'd probably cost more to produce than the DAVE! The DAS-R1 DAC alone retailed for £1500, in 1989. How much would that equate to in today's money?
Aside from that, these things were built as 'cost no object' projects by huge companies like Sony, 'flexing their muscles' and showing the world just how good CD could sound. To build something similar today would be prohibitively expensive, particularly as Philips TDA 1541s are costly to implement optimally.
Also, as you've mentioned, the market just isn't there now for high-end CDPs, so when it comes to the X-777ES, almost no-one's building players now with proper CD-only transport mechs (such as the VRDS NEO I linked to earlier), and simply using cheap-as-chips (but grossly inferior) plastic DVD ROMs.
Therefore, as I said, it all comes down to cost and the fact that virtually no-one today would buy what it would take to produce a 'cost no object' CDP, in the way of the best ones from the heyday of CD, and when the major Jap players were building their very impressive 'statement' products, all based on optimising solid engineering principles, not on cost, convenience, miniaturisation, or creating the latest 'technology fad', to brainwash buyers into believing its the best, as is so much hi-fi equipment that's produced nowadays.
Marco.
Most of the top players of the day were statement items that actually made little to no money for the likes of Marantz, Sony, Denon etc. The money came in trickle down and more mass market players.
I am sure your DAS R1 is stunningly good, but limited now in regards to it will only decode red book, or hi rez files converted to red book, and the USB to Coax converter required - if using a PC/Mac source - will have to be very good so as not to mess things up - those make a big difference.
I have three very good DACs, and excellent transports and I still prefer vinyl.
Not that much actually, on an adjusted-for-inflation basis £1,500 in 1987 equates to £3,425 today according to the Bank of England's inflation calculator. But of course high-end hifi prices have gone silly in the past few years, so I doubt it'd be sold at that level, as that wouldn't be 'statement' enough.
Indeed, so that's around £3.5k before, as you say, today's "silly" high-end pricing.
So let's conservatively double that, then you've got the cost of producing something of the ilk of an X-777ES, or the partnering Sony R1 transport, which I originally bought with the DAS-R1 DAC, which would be equally as expensive, if not more so, therefore that gives you an inking into what something likes that would cost nowadays - and that's excluding what I've spent on mods, on top of that!
Marco.
Take a read of this post which explains a little better than I could the PSU in DAVE. Just scroll down to Rob Watts explanation.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-270
Will do, Jim, but as you said, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, or rather the listening! ;)
It would be good to have a bake-off with this at NEBO, but we'd need someone there who owns a DAVE...
Marco.
Will do, Jim, but as you said, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, or rather the listening! ;)
It would be good to have a bake-off with this at NEBO, but we'd need someone there who owns a DAVE...
Marco.
Yes listening is definitely the only absolute way to know if anything is any good and not sure if anyone on AOS has one . The one I listen too belongs to Steve and the only way of getting to listen to his is by visiting his business.
Most of the top players of the day were statement items that actually made little to no money for the likes of Marantz, Sony, Denon etc. The money came in trickle down and more mass market players.
Indeed, and that rarely happens now. The whole approach and focus today with audio has completely changed, simply because the market (and potential customer base) has.
I am sure your DAS R1 is stunningly good, but limited now in regards to it will only decode red book, or hi rez files converted to red book, and the USB to Coax converter required - if using a PC/Mac source - will have to be very good so as not to mess things up - those make a big difference.
Indeed, which is why it's not used for that purpose, and simply to reproduce red book CD to the highest standard :)
I have three very good DACs, and excellent transports and I still prefer vinyl.
So do I with the best recordings, just!
However, given the best recordings, both on vinyl and CD, you can put a piece of fag paper between the Techy and the Sonys, in terms of how good they are at making recorded music sound believable and real.
I just don't think that many folks today, for a variety of reasons (and I don't include you in this), have genuinely heard CD at its absolute best.
Marco.
Yes listening is definitely the only absolute way to know if anything is any good and not sure if anyone on AOS has one . The one I listen too belongs to Steve and the only way of getting to listen to his is by visiting his business.
Do you think he'd be up for me bringing the Sonys along to his place, to compare with the DAVE, and then reporting the results on AoS? If he'd be up for that, I certainly would be!
If he's truly got confidence in his product, and it's as good as you say it is, he should welcome subjecting it to such scrutiny :)
Marco.
Most of the top players of the day were statement items that actually made little to no money for the likes of Marantz, Sony, Denon etc. The money came in trickle down and more mass market players.
I am sure your DAS R1 is stunningly good, but limited now in regards to it will only decode red book, or hi rez files converted to red book, and the USB to Coax converter required - if using a PC/Mac source - will have to be very good so as not to mess things up - those make a big difference.
I have three very good DACs, and excellent transports and I still prefer vinyl.
From what I have heard Neil I agree with you - I still prefer vinyl but it would be handy to have a top notch digital system. I have heard the Moon Andromeda CD player you have and actually used this to compare against a FBA system.
Ali Tait
09-09-2017, 11:54
I had a Moon player, very good it was. It was spanked by a Teac P30 I bought after though. Should've kept that..
Do you think he'd be up for me bringing the Sonys along to his place, to compare with the DAVE, and then reporting the results on AoS? If he'd be up for that, I certainly would be!
If he's truly got confidence in his product, and it's as good as you say it is, he should welcome subjecting it to such scrutiny :)
Marco.
I will ask about the connection issue. He runs only balanced XLR with DAVE but will ask if your CDP can be hooked up to it.
Of course if Steve won't do it maybe ask Hi FI Lounge - I am sure he has a DAVE DAC?
For me, personally, no matter how good a turntable may sound it completely ruins my enjoyment changing sides on an LP. In fact it had got to the stage where I would be thinking of changing it while I was listening to a side, a real pain. I like to sit down, recline and zone out for 30 or 40 minutes which I can do with CD.
Also, as much as I liked my turntable my CD player trounced it which helped in the decision to get rid of the TT.
One thing I do like about LPs is that you've no inclination to skip tracks so you listen to the entire album as a whole rather than skipping the odd one. Try leaving your CD remote control in a different room, surprisingly effective :D
For me, personally, no matter how good a turntable may sound it completely ruins my enjoyment changing sides on an LP. In fact it had got to the stage where I would be thinking of changing it while I was listening to a side, a real pain. I like to sit down, recline and zone out for 30 or 40 minutes which I can do with CD.
Also, as much as I liked my turntable my CD player trounced it which helped in the decision to get rid of the TT.
One thing I do like about LPs is that you've no inclination to skip tracks so you listen to the entire album as a whole rather than skipping the odd one. Try leaving your CD remote control in a different room, surprisingly effective :D
Are there many 30 or 40 minute cd albums about? I always think most cds have quite a few 'filler' tracks just to get them to near 80 mins. I have digital and vinyl but for me the sound of vinyl is what I grew up with so no doubt that is why I prefer it. I like the hands on of vinyl and no doubt that's an age thing too.
Your tip about the cd remote is a good one [emoji6]
Looking at someone's music collection you can tell probably their age from it, I think it's similar with digital vs analogue ( but not always of course ).
Only time I do any 'skipping' is with the radio and that's so I cut out the ads and the news [emoji23]
Spectral Morn
09-09-2017, 13:45
I had a Moon player, very good it was. It was spanked by a Teac P30 I bought after though. Should've kept that..
I think you had a Moon Nova, if I recall right. Nice but I would have suspected the Teac would be better.
I wanted a best I could afford player at the time so listened to top Wadias and the like at the time and the two box Andromeda did everything I wanted but did it in a nice musical way. Wadias are fab, but dissect the music a wee bit too much for my ultimate taste.
The Esoteric kit I have I use for SACD, again I wanted the best I could afford and those are very good bar the noisy transport, less noise though than the Esoteric P3 transport, stunning but one could hear its mech half way across the room, particularly when playing SACDs. Don't know why it is but most modernish Esoterics have noisy mechanisms.
Spectral Morn
09-09-2017, 13:49
I will ask about the connection issue. He runs only balanced XLR with DAVE but will ask if your CDP can be hooked up to it.
Of course if Steve won't do it maybe ask Hi FI Lounge - I am sure he has a DAVE DAC?
Hi James looked at a picture of the back and it looks like it has a Coax digital in so shouldn't be an issue, there are though BNCs too, so if Marco had a BNC to RCA adapter that might be useful.
Will be an interesting comparison.
EDIT Marco will need a BNC to RCA adapter. The RCA I was looking at was the right channel RCA output :doh: One of these https://www.amazon.com/RiteAV-BNC-Male-Female-Adapter/dp/B000V1R97U
Hi James looked at a picture of the back and it looks like it has a Coax digital in so shouldn't be an issue, there are though BNCs too, so if Marco had a BNC to RCA adapter that might be useful.
Will be an interesting comparison.
EDIT Marco will need a BNC to RCA adapter. The RCA I was looking at was the right channel RCA output :doh:
Thanks for checking Neil.
Firebottle
09-09-2017, 14:07
I've got a box full of different adapters if one is need at any time :)
BNC, N type, SMA, F plugs (horrible things), RCA, Belling Lee plus others.
Ali Tait
09-09-2017, 17:01
I think you had a Moon Nova, if I recall right. Nice but I would have suspected the Teac would be better.
I wanted a best I could afford player at the time so listened to top Wadias and the like at the time and the two box Andromeda did everything I wanted but did it in a nice musical way. Wadias are fab, but dissect the music a wee bit too much for my ultimate taste.
The Esoteric kit I have I use for SACD, again I wanted the best I could afford and those are very good bar the noisy transport, less noise though than the Esoteric P3 transport, stunning but one could hear its mech half way across the room, particularly when playing SACDs. Don't know why it is but most modernish Esoterics have noisy mechanisms.
Yes I think that's right Neil, my memory is not getting any better..
magiccarpetride
11-09-2017, 16:56
Been pondering this. Of course I've heard well set up digital systems as well as vinyl systems - both of which can sound incredible.
However what I have not experienced is a well set up digital source within the same system of a well set up vinyl source. That is using the same downstream items (preamp, amp, speakers).
Does anyone have such a system and if so what opinions of the resultant sounds?
Edward
Sent via Tapatalk
I think I have commensurably similar digital and analogue front ends feeding my back end stereo. I've spent a lot of time tweaking my digital front end to make it approximate the warm and relaxed sound that a good analogue does, and I think I've largely succeeded.
When I compare my digital to analogue playback, the digital sounds much cleaner than the analogue. Almost clinically clean, and the presentation is neat and effortless. The analogue, on the other hand, sounds dirtier, messier, with some garlic on top. But it's definitely isn't lifeless -- it adds a lot of whomp and kick to the music. Simply put, on my system analogue swings much harder than digital.
I think I have commensurably similar digital and analogue front ends feeding my back end stereo. I've spent a lot of time tweaking my digital front end to make it approximate the warm and relaxed sound that a good analogue does, and I think I've largely succeeded.
When I compare my digital to analogue playback, the digital sounds much cleaner than the analogue. Almost clinically clean, and the presentation is neat and effortless. The analogue, on the other hand, sounds dirtier, messier, with some garlic on top. But it's definitely isn't lifeless -- it adds a lot of whomp and kick to the music. Simply put, on my system analogue swings much harder than digital.
Same here. I've a lot of the same albums on cd as well as on vinyl. Even accounting for mastering differences the vinyl sound grabs me more, but at the same time when I have heard playback in studios it is closer to how digital presents; as you say, clean and neat. It does, however have a 'rawness' or an 'openness' in the studio that my digital end doesn't quite manage. It still grabs you but in a different way. Marco's Sony's present it like in the studio. I'd urge anyone who thinks digital is a second cousin to vinyl, or that red book cd is at all compromised, should ask him if they can go round for a listen.
337alant
11-09-2017, 18:00
Like others have said I have good sources in both digital and analogue so quite happy with either TBH
But as everyone knows they are both blown away by tape on R2R so there :D yes :mental:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMVAmf95x5xI0nyOEcIHRrw/videos
Alan
Same here. I've a lot of the same albums on cd as well as on vinyl. Even accounting for mastering differences the vinyl sound grabs me more, but at the same time when I have heard playback in studios it is closer to how digital presents; as you say, clean and neat. It does, however have a 'rawness' or an 'openness' in the studio that my digital end doesn't quite manage. It still grabs you but in a different way. Marco's Sony's present it like in the studio. I'd urge anyone who thinks digital is a second cousin to vinyl, or that red book cd is at all compromised, should ask him if they can go round for a listen.
They'll have to wait first until the 'broom cupboard' has been emptied of an assortment of kitchen paraphernalia, lol, and the place gets back to normal, but thanks! New kitchen being delivered and fitted this week - at long fooking last!! :D
Marco.
In WW2 they built the Mulberry harbours in less time than it has taken to do your kitchen. This is why I can't be bothered to sort mine.
I get the clean and clear sound of digital and it can sound full bloodied like vinyl but only with well mastered recordings. I think the clean sound is a result of a very low noise floor and a lack of dust:) My vinyl system does sound very clean and clear but a bit muddy in the bass. One of the key aspects I find however between vinyl and digital is the dimensional issue. Vinyl does 3D so easily and I get lots of acoustic information around the performers and instruments. I have heard this get better and better with the latest DACs but quite often this information is either missing or severely curtailed.
No doubt digital playback has got a great deal better especially as the issues of noise pollution in the system and electronics has been identified and sorted with carefull design and routing particularly in FBA systems. Cables including CAT7 still transmit electrical noise but this can be negated using devices like a TP-LINK MC200CM Gigabit Media Converter between NAS drives and media players. The noise generated from computers such as lap tops can be improved on by using devices like the Sonore MicroRendu.
Although I still feel vinyl sounds more inviting, musical and easy to listen too I do feel digital has now evolved to a point it is definitely a worthwhile alternative or addition to a system. The interesting thing I have found is that as it has improved it sounds more and more analogue which is a good thing in my book.
magiccarpetride
11-09-2017, 18:16
Same here. I've a lot of the same albums on cd as well as on vinyl. Even accounting for mastering differences the vinyl sound grabs me more, but at the same time when I have heard playback in studios it is closer to how digital presents; as you say, clean and neat. It does, however have a 'rawness' or an 'openness' in the studio that my digital end doesn't quite manage. It still grabs you but in a different way. Marco's Sony's present it like in the studio. I'd urge anyone who thinks digital is a second cousin to vinyl, or that red book cd is at all compromised, should ask him if they can go round for a listen.
True. I was recently at the local classical record store (selling mostly vinyl), and they were playing some string quartet by Beethoven. The string instruments were so full of life, and the presence was so uncanny, that I had to ask the sales staff which LP are they spinning. Much to my surprise, they were playing a CD!
magiccarpetride
11-09-2017, 18:26
I get the clean and clear sound of digital and it can sound full bloodied like vinyl but only with well mastered recordings. I think the clean sound is a result of a very low noise floor and a lack of dust:) My vinyl system does sound very clean and clear but a bit muddy in the bass. One of the key aspects I find however between vinyl and digital is the dimensional issue. Vinyl does 3D so easily and I get lots of acoustic information around the performers and instruments. I have heard this get better and better with the latest DACs but quite often this information is either missing or severely curtailed.
No doubt digital playback has got a great deal better especially as the issues of noise pollution in the system and electronics has been identified and sorted with carefull design and routing particularly in FBA systems. Cables including CAT7 still transmit electrical noise but this can be negated using devices like a TP-LINK MC200CM Gigabit Media Converter between NAS drives and media players. The noise generated from computers such as lap tops can be improved on by using devices like the Sonore MicroRendu.
Although I still feel vinyl sounds more inviting, musical and easy to listen too I do feel digital has now evolved to a point it is definitely a worthwhile alternative or addition to a system. The interesting thing I have found is that as it has improved it sounds more and more analogue which is a good thing in my book.
Interesting observations, and I concur. As I was doing the tweaks to my digital front end, I was noticing that the biggest steps towards analogue-like sound were being achieved whenever I would successfully eliminate some of the electrical noises. The biggest improvement I've ever noticed was when I switched from linear power supply for my DAC to powering it via rechargeable ANKAKA battery. That was a jaw dropping improvement.
Yes using really good linear power supplies with DACs , servers etc can dramatically improve SQ. Noise is certainly a big issue with digital. I think the simpler set up the better but this is not always achievable if you need back up devices and everything you have in the system from the router to the server adds noise.
Bit perfect files also a prerequisite and it helps if you have a really great DAC!
In WW2 they built the Mulberry harbours in less time than it has taken to do your kitchen. This is why I can't be bothered to sort mine.
Lol... It's what happens when you go for a compete gut out, then start again from an empty shell with something that's bespoke built - and also when you're *extremely fussy* about getting every last detail just right! ;)
Marco.
Although I still feel vinyl sounds more inviting, musical and easy to listen too I do feel digital has now evolved to a point it is definitely a worthwhile alternative or addition to a system. The interesting thing I have found is that as it has improved it sounds more and more analogue which is a good thing in my book.
Or not "evolved", like mine, since 1989! :D;)
For me, my turntable has evolved into sounding more like a really good CD player [stable and effortless with very low coloration], but with the inherent musical qualities of analogue.
Well, you've heard my T/T, Jim, at NEBO. My CD player largely sounds like a digital version of that :)
Marco.
Or not "evolved", like mine, since 1989! :D;)
For me, my turntable has evolved into sounding more like a really good CD player [stable and effortless with very low coloration], but with the inherent musical qualities of analogue.
Well, you've heard my T/T, Jim, at NEBO. My CD player largely sounds like a digital version of that :)
Marco.
But has you CD not 'evolved' through various upgrades?:D
Yeah I know, but you get the point! :eyebrows:
In all honesty though, the upgrades (mods) you mention are *absolutely fundamental* to the sound the Sonys produce now, and the type of musical presentation Martin and I have described. It's all about marrying the best of old and new technology - that's what the majority of my system is about.
I remember all too well what they sounded like from stock, and trust me, while they were good (they needed to have been, otherwise I wouldn't have bought them in the first place, or more importantly spent £2k on mods if I hadn't heard some potential), there's no way they'd be able to compete with the kind of kit they can now.
The situation is almost identical with the Techy, which I also recognised the potential in, modded it as I felt was best, and the rest as they say is history ;)
Marco.
Yeah I know, but you get the point! :eyebrows:
In all honesty though, the upgrades (mods) you mention are *absolutely fundamental* to the sound the Sonys produce now, and the type of musical presentation Martin and I have described. It's all about marrying the best of old and new technology - that's what the majority of my system is about.
I remember all too well what they sounded like from stock, and trust me, while they were good (they needed to have been, otherwise I wouldn't have bought them in the first place, or more importantly spent £2k on mods if I hadn't heard some potential), there's no way they'd be able to compete with the kind of kit they can now.
The situation is almost identical with the Techy, which I also recognised the potential in, modded it as I felt was best, and the rest as they say is history ;)
Marco.
Are you tempted by the new SP10R when it comes out. Some of the engineering and technology used for speed stability etc and isolation sounds very tasty?:)
Indeed, have you not read my posts on the thread in Techiepedia?
Marco.
Indeed, have you not read my posts on the thread in Techiepedia?
Marco.
No, I will take a look.:cool:
No probs. A potential purchase of an SP10R essentially hinges on two things: 1) what the final price will be, and 2) whether I can compare one in a plinth to my current T/T :)
I'd need to know that it fundamentally improves on what I have now, and crucially, in a way I can't remedy with further mods to my existing T/T... Essentially, this means that the motor unit itself is just overall better. It should be, but for me the proof of the pudding is always in the listening!
Marco.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.