Vinyl Asylum

Welcome Licorice Pizza (LP) lovers! Setup guides and Vinyl FAQ.

Return to Vinyl Asylum


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Vinyl Vs. Digital

98.144.114.174

Posted on August 25, 2019 at 17:53:20
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
This horse isn't dead! It's still twitching. It may well be a zombie horse.

Who finds that commercial digital can match or surpass vinyl records of recordings of acoustic music - made in analog - in the areas of naturalness, instrument separation, timbre, and, dimensionality?

If you do, please specify your equipment and details.

If, OTOH, you think no digital playback system captures the immediacy and realism that vinyl does, shout it loud & proud!

(As for me, I keep trying to get into the first camp but find myself still in the second.)

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: What's the point of rehashing this yet again? nt, posted on August 25, 2019 at 19:33:35
thegage
Audiophile

Posts: 1157
Location: Western Mass.
Joined: April 29, 2000

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 25, 2019 at 21:38:38
John Elison
Audiophile

Posts: 23874
Location: Central Kentucky
Joined: December 20, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
January 29, 2004
> As for me, I keep trying to get into the first camp but find myself still in the second.

It's unclear to me what you mean by the first camp and the second camp. As for me, I am now in the digital camp!

I became very interested in digital just after buying a DAT recorder in 1991. I'd owned several different CD players beginning in 1983 but I couldn't find a CD that equaled my best sounding vinyl. Even to this day I haven't found many CDs that equal vinyl in terms of naturalness, realism and high-frequency smoothness. The problems I find with CDs has mainly to do with the high-frequencies, which often sound harsh and strident compared to good vinyl. It wasn't until 1991 that I began to think digital was something special after making my first DAT recording of a vinyl record. Still, commercial digital recordings rarely impress me the way topnotch vinyl does.

About five years ago I bought a TASCAM DA-3000 DSD recorder and discovered the next level in digital performance. DSD is really superb, even commercial digital recordings in DSD128 and DSD256 sound exquisite to my ears. I now own about 30 Quad DSD recordings that impress me just as much as vinyl. These are not up-sampled from lower resolution PCM but are original DSD256 recordings. Some have been recorded directly to DSD256 while others were recorded from high-speed analog master tapes directly to DSD256. I believe they would all meet your requirements of naturalness, instrument separation, timbre, and, dimensionality. They certainly impress me as sounding even better than my best vinyl. Consequently, I'm now heavily into the digital camp.

My equipment is as follows:

Sota Millennia Vacuum turntable with SME V tonearm and Audio Technica ART7 phono cartridge into a Pass Labs XOno phono preamp.

Mytek Brooklyn Bridge Preamp/DAC/Streamer with JRiver streaming software on my HP Windows computer.

Parasound Halo A21 power amplifier with XLR balanced interconnects from the Mytek Brooklyn Bridge's balanced outputs.

Thiel CS3.7 speakers with a pair of Rythmik 12" Servo Subwoofers.

Best regards,
John Elison



.
.
.
This is a current picture of my system in which I moved my speakers farther out into the room for better imaging and soundstage.


 

Different methods of playing CD on a cd player - different sound, posted on August 26, 2019 at 00:52:36
jeromelang
Audiophile

Posts: 2303
Joined: February 2, 2001
First, refresh and clean residue memory

Then directly cue track without leaving memory imprint and play

 

+1 nt, posted on August 26, 2019 at 04:28:07
ghost of olddude55
Audiophile

Posts: 32343
Joined: July 14, 2017
nt



The blissful counterstroke-a considerable new message.

 

Who cares...nt, posted on August 26, 2019 at 05:47:20
EdAInWestOC
Audiophile

Posts: 6828
Location: Glen Burnie, MD USA
Joined: December 18, 2003
nt
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof

 

OK, I'll take a stab at it ..., posted on August 26, 2019 at 06:42:16
TeddiJackEddie
Audiophile

Posts: 2091
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Joined: January 2, 2004
I had/have an old Pioneer CDR. I've burned vinyl on it, of and on for years. I take the signal from the turntable into a tube phono stage. Then I turn the volume way up on the CDR and adjust the VU's with the volume control on the tube preamp.

For some weird reason, those burned discs sounded as good or almost as good as the vinyl! Definitely a lot better than the CDs from the record company.

I remember I had the first Old & In the Way album. It was on Rounder (I think) and it was recorded, mixed, and produced by the guy who invented purple acid (his name escapes me now). Well, they never released the CD of it (actually, they did in Europe, but for the longest time, not here). So I burned a copy of it and made a few copies and sent them to my friends. Now these people - mostly - were not audiophiles. Every single one of them, when they wrote back to me to thank me for the CD, said 'How in the hell did you get that CD to sound so good?'

A couple of my audiophile buddies said it was the best sounding CD in their CD collection. Now we come to why ...- I have no f*cking idea, but it does! I have theories, but they are just theories.

Cheers,
TJE

 

+2. Jeez, again? nt, posted on August 26, 2019 at 06:49:47
nt

 

flavors of illusion, posted on August 26, 2019 at 07:51:04
beach cruiser
Audiophile

Posts: 7018
Location: so cal
Joined: September 24, 2003
I always enjoy a report of happiness, and am glad your system is putting out enough joy to make a guy happy enough to share.

For me, it could only be a contest between illusions. I don't sweat even a shadow of conflict between various playback methods. because I have only one, Holmes.

I started out with a two channel vinyl system, and am still working on playback quality via a two channel vinyl system. Once that gets good, I'll consider adding digital.

By sticking close to that creed, I avoided a lot of latest greatest merchandise and formats through the years, although I tried, briefly , four channel,,and use digital music in the car.

I read that today, hi fi digital is a viable way to go, and digital has to be less space intensive than a fifty year vinyl collection. Of course, there are some memories connected with the old stuff that a digital display can't transmit.

I like nice equipment, but I don't sweat chasing performance down to the last eyelash. since, logically, few of the recordings i play feature a group size that would fit in the space occupied by my stereo system, and don't even think about recreating the sound volume used to make the recording.

It is all illusion, there is no reality there, so no tube rolling, or endangered wood anywhere around my playback system. I just buy carefully, and then upgrade as needed, and my needs are simple. I like a realistic sound, the sound quality of which is usually dictated by my budget.

I sometimes attend a revival movie house. They have a bosendorfer grand player piano, the only musical playback device I can think of that can accurately record and playback music, as long as it is solo piano music.

Next to it is a full theatre organ, it is played along with the silent movies, to bolster the illusion, it has bells, train whistles , car horns, snare drums, everything one might reasonably need to fill in the illusion of a moving picture. That little old movie house can't throw the illusion of a state of the art house playing a modern action movie. But I laugh just as well at both places. i know going in I am not buying a ticket for reality,

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 26, 2019 at 08:37:17
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37471
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
April 5, 2002
For me, high resolution 24 bit digital combines the best attributes of vinyl and Redbook 44/16.

Most importantly, I enjoy new music! Virtually all *new* vinyl today is pressed from a digitally recorded source.

Follow moniker for system details.

 

analogue plus digital: Plangent, posted on August 26, 2019 at 08:51:25
Bill Way
Audiophile

Posts: 1884
Location: Toms River NJ
Joined: May 28, 2012
Contributor
  Since:
December 14, 2012



Most of my favorite listening is LPs, and I spent many years chopping up/modding an old Thorens until it started doing what I wanted. Until a few years ago, the best I ever heard was a 15 ips half-track tape. As Harry Weisfeld said during a VPI tour, pointing to a half-track deck, "That'll blow everything here out of the water."




That changed with the Tom Fine Plangent remastering of the Duprey/Detroit Saint-Saëns 3rd Symphony. It is the best reproduction I've heard. As it requires tape to be somewhere in the chain, along with a digital session, it straddles both worlds. The only downside is the paucity of Plangent-processed recordings. There just aren't that many of them.

Gear: modded TD-125 II, MusicMaker, Hadcock 242, VTL Deluxe & Graham Slee phono stages (patiently awaiting EveAnna's new preamp), Manley Shrimp, Snappers; Tannoy Stirling GRs; Otari MX5050 B2-II, Metric Halo ULN-2/3D; Senn HD800 + Bottlehead Crack/Speedball; PS Audio line filter. Wire from Cardas, anticable, Venhaus, Blue Jeans, others.

WW
"Put on your high heeled sneakers. Baby, we''re goin'' out tonight.

 

P.S., posted on August 26, 2019 at 08:57:57
Bill Way
Audiophile

Posts: 1884
Location: Toms River NJ
Joined: May 28, 2012
Contributor
  Since:
December 14, 2012
To answer the OP's original question more directly, some music does better to me in digital, even lowly CDs, and other music better on LP. Solo piano often sounds better in digital, whereas strings and vocals are often better on LP. The huge dynamics on a couple Mahler SACDs are *very* compelling. So my answer is, "All of 'em, Katie!"

WW
"Put on your high heeled sneakers. Baby, we''re goin'' out tonight.

 

+1 RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 26, 2019 at 09:28:38
jedrider
Audiophile

Posts: 15154
Location: No. California
Joined: December 26, 2003
You had best reply. It's got to be that pure digital can be superior to a pure analog recording and playback chain.

For the rest of us, redbook digital and vinyl analog are just the yin and the yang of recorded music.

Thanks for making the point (visually) of my recent discovery that a subwoofer is often necessary for proper sound reproduction (despite what many audiophiles say).

 

+1 RE: P.S., posted on August 26, 2019 at 09:32:32
jedrider
Audiophile

Posts: 15154
Location: No. California
Joined: December 26, 2003
Good observation: I am always torn between the different aspects of CD versus vinyl. Answer to which is best: Both, perhaps.

 

that's how mine sound too!, posted on August 26, 2019 at 10:22:18
NuWave
Audiophile

Posts: 2619
Location: Wisconsin
Joined: March 22, 2002
So is the 16 bit digital model actually flawed? However I've gotten a better phono stage and better cartridges since making those. Debating if I should record some of them again.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 26, 2019 at 11:20:37
MannyE
Audiophile

Posts: 2088
Location: Miami Beach
Joined: March 4, 2001
Oof... You're spraying everyone with offal.

 

Seems like we have this discussion re Plangent every few months ;-), posted on August 26, 2019 at 11:52:27
Posts: 26351
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since:
February 6, 2012
Why. . . wasn't it just last March? ;-) BTW, as you probably already know, most (maybe all) of those Mercury Szeryng Plangent remasterings are available at HDTracks in the UK as 24/192 downloads. I've downloaded them all myself.

 

Love that deck., posted on August 26, 2019 at 13:37:28
One serious looking piece of kit!



8^)

 

You're right, posted on August 26, 2019 at 13:48:15
Bill Way
Audiophile

Posts: 1884
Location: Toms River NJ
Joined: May 28, 2012
Contributor
  Since:
December 14, 2012
We do have this every few months, and if I'm not mistaken, I'm the one who keeps bringing it up. Sorry for the repetition, but I am still enthusiastic about the system.

WW
"Put on your high heeled sneakers. Baby, we''re goin'' out tonight.

 

"I am still enthusiastic about the system" - Me too! [nt] ;-), posted on August 26, 2019 at 15:20:47
Posts: 26351
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since:
February 6, 2012

 

RE: +1 RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 26, 2019 at 17:17:32
John Elison
Audiophile

Posts: 23874
Location: Central Kentucky
Joined: December 20, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
January 29, 2004
Yes, subwoofers are needed in my system. I think the Thiel CS3.7 speakers would have been better had they used two active woofers instead of one active and one passive radiator. The previous picture is more than a year old and since taking it I've moved my speakers farther out into the room for better imaging. The Rythmik Servo Subs fill in the bottom octave and blend seamlessly. They don't stand out at all; they just produce the deep bass when it's available in the music. I adjust their volume so that a string bass playing up and down the scale has the same loudness from top to bottom. This system sounds better than any system I've previously owned. Sonically, the speakers disappear and the soundstage is holographic.

Here's a current picture of my system:



 

Vinyl (Decca mono), posted on August 26, 2019 at 21:01:31






Even some original mono albums are clearer than the CD remasters. This Decca mono of very early Rolling Stones is an excellent example. IMHO< vocals are clearer and more natural --- more of a live sound --- than the 2002 ABKCO remastered CD.

Well worth trying to find a good used red label Decca of this LP.




 

I will be adding a second subwoofer..., posted on August 26, 2019 at 21:06:59
Cougar
Audiophile

Posts: 4562
Location: SoCal
Joined: June 25, 2001
very soon. I have been very happy with the Subwoofer I got from Monoprice. I got the Monolith 10" THX subwoofer and it blends very well with my Clearfield Audio Continental speakers from Counterpoint. So I can just imagine how it will sound with them running in Stereo than Mono. This has been one of the better buys for my system.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 26, 2019 at 21:22:05
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
It gets closer, but not there in the midrange. I have many DSD and 24/96 and 24/192 PCM recordings.

They are better than vinyl in some ways (noise, dynamics, bandwidth) but not, to my ear, in making a trumpet sound like a trumpet.

 

RE: OK, I'll take a stab at it ..., posted on August 26, 2019 at 21:28:34
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
I have many 24/192 and DSD128 recordings made from vinyl. To be sure, they sound so close to the source (a flawed analog source) that most can't even tell them apart.

But once the ear is trained, they can be reliable distinguished, especially in long-term listening.

In some ways, they are better than commercial hi-res digital recordings. But I think they actually have all the inherent weaknesses of digital along with vinyl's issues (which to me are tolerable but still deviations from ideal).

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 26, 2019 at 21:51:25
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
I also think commercial DSD and hi-res PCM recordings can sound exquisite. But they still don't make a trumpet sound like a trumpet as well as vinyl (at lower total cost).

Recent examples from my collection:

- Blakey, Ugestu
- Herbie Hancock, Maiden Voyage
- Miles Davis - many titles (everything Acoustic Sounds sells on hi-res basically)

Mind you, these recordings all sound fabulous in absolute terms. If I didn't have analog copies of the same recordings, I wouldn't dare to think there was anything better.

And when I listen to something I only have on hi-res, such as, for example, Hubbard's "Night of the Cookers," it floors me.

But the best vinyl still puts the trumpet in the room better than the best digital. If the best vinyl is 100, the best digital (which I find is 24/96 or 24/192 PCM) is a 90 or so.

But, Ok, I don't have any DSD256. Where are you buying that stuff?

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 27, 2019 at 01:31:49
rindolini
Audiophile

Posts: 584
Location: Munich, Bavaria
Joined: August 9, 2007
Call me odd, but I prefer turntables to CD players and at the same time CDs to records (*).

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

*) Reasonable mixes on CD provided. Unfortunately many CDs today rather seem to contain overly compressed mixes, which I'm not so fond of...

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 27, 2019 at 02:23:14
John Elison
Audiophile

Posts: 23874
Location: Central Kentucky
Joined: December 20, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
January 29, 2004
> If the best vinyl is 100, the best digital (which I find is 24/96 or 24/192 PCM) is a 90 or so.

Hi Paul:

You might be right! I specifically excluded giving PCM digital my absolute praise because I don't think it sounds as good as DSD128 and DSD256. I'm not even sure about DSD64 either; although, I have some exceptional sounding DSD64 rips from SACDs. However, my DSD128 copies of vinyl and my commercial DSD256 downloads have impressed me like no other digital I've heard.

Unfortunately, I'm not a trumpet enthusiast, so I can't say for sure that even DSD256 will impress you in that regard. Moreover, you'd need to listen to a new recording of a trumpet in DSD256 rather than a DSD256 copy of an old master tape. Vinyl has a significant advantage over analog tape in that it preserves the original sound quite nicely. Consequently, many modern digital recordings taken from old analog master tapes cannot possibly sound as good as vinyl produced when the master tapes were brand new. Therefore, you'll need to find new recordings of a trumpet in either DSD128 or DSD256. However, based on the accuracy I hear with my DSD128 copies of vinyl, I believe both DSD128 and DSD256 should be able to accurately capture the sound of a trumpet.

If you're interested in buying DSD128 and DSD256 recordings, check out the following website.

Best regards,
John Elison

 

That is odd!, posted on August 27, 2019 at 02:41:07
John Elison
Audiophile

Posts: 23874
Location: Central Kentucky
Joined: December 20, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
January 29, 2004
Are you implying that you play your CDs on a turntable? ;-)

 

RE: analogue plus digital: Plangent, posted on August 27, 2019 at 03:54:31
Munkie_NL
Audiophile

Posts: 4859
Location: Netherlands
Joined: August 24, 2003
Very nice TT indeed. My old TD125mkII/SME3009 looks like sh*t compared to yours. Alas it's in the attic, my main TT is a modded Lenco.

"The torture never stops"

Greetings Freek.

 

Ok, posted on August 27, 2019 at 05:46:17
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37471
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
April 5, 2002
It's true I continue to find refinements via improvements in digital playback system, i.e. ultraRendu/LPS-1.2 vs. microRendu/LPS-1, using linear power supplies for network components and housing LMS on NAS.

Happy with Audio Research DAC8 using zero feedback discrete analog output stage running balanced.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 27, 2019 at 07:43:57
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
My bias is hi-res PCM over DSD.

But my DSD is compromised now because I use my Melco server to convert it to PCM on the fly for my Schiit Yggy.

The Yggy is by far the best PCM DAC I've had, but, of course, does not do DSD.

I may have to pick up a dedicated DSD DAC again. The Mytek is probably a good choice. For whatever reason, I find there is less variability in DSD DACs than PCM.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 27, 2019 at 08:13:16
John Elison
Audiophile

Posts: 23874
Location: Central Kentucky
Joined: December 20, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
January 29, 2004
There's no question in my mind that the Mytek Brooklyn Bridge is an excellent DAC. It's the best sounding DAC I've ever owned.

There's also another one that intrigues me. It's the Teac NT-505. It contains a pair of the latest AKM AK4497 DAC chips and supports PCM up to 32-bit/768-kHz as well as DSD512. Furthermore, it costs a thousand dollars less than the Mytek Brooklyn Bridge.

In addition to the Brooklyn Bridge, I also own a FiiO M11. This is an exceptional autonomous hi-res digital player that supports PCM up to 24-bit/384-kHz and DSD256. I think it sounds nearly as good as the Mytek and it costs only $450. It requires the addition of two micro SD memory cards, which drives the price up a little, but it's well worth it in my opinion.

Good luck,
John Elison

 

I think digital is great until..., posted on August 27, 2019 at 18:09:29
bigshow
Audiophile

Posts: 472
Location: WI
Joined: December 3, 2012
Until I play vinyl.
bigshow

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 27, 2019 at 18:29:39
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
I had a Teac 503 or something a couple years ago. Only so-so playing my DSD128 vinyl rips.

You inspired me to hunt for current top-tier DSD DACs (DACs which *excel* at DSD, not just play it) and I came up with this: Chord Hugo II.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 27, 2019 at 19:45:25
mkane77g
Audiophile

Posts: 183
Location: CA
Joined: February 19, 2017



all the time

 

RE: I think digital is great until..., posted on August 28, 2019 at 18:22:03
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
E X A C T L Y

Every night here.

Thus this thread (which seems to have annoyed some).

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 28, 2019 at 18:22:40
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
You were standing too close.

 

RE: P.S., posted on August 28, 2019 at 18:25:19
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
I concur. There is no doubt that digital does some things better.

But the *most important* thing for me is making the midrange (where music lives) of acoustic instruments sound real, and analog is still doing that better for me.

 

Sure you can ..., posted on August 28, 2019 at 18:36:11
J. S. Bach
Audiophile

Posts: 9571
Location: Chester, SC
Joined: November 28, 2001
Contributor
  Since:
June 29, 2004
...:






Later Gator,
Dave
Find more about Weather in Chester, SC

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 28, 2019 at 18:43:32
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
What is that cart?

 

Old CDs become anti-skate testers! 8^) (n/t) , posted on August 28, 2019 at 18:48:04
mt

 

Thank you for the big laugh! )MT(, posted on August 28, 2019 at 19:04:55
J. S. Bach
Audiophile

Posts: 9571
Location: Chester, SC
Joined: November 28, 2001
Contributor
  Since:
June 29, 2004


Later Gator,
Dave
Find more about Weather in Chester, SC

 

Great idea for setting antiskate! ;-) /nt\, posted on August 28, 2019 at 19:52:58
John Elison
Audiophile

Posts: 23874
Location: Central Kentucky
Joined: December 20, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
January 29, 2004

 

RE: That is odd!, posted on August 29, 2019 at 00:20:38
rindolini
Audiophile

Posts: 584
Location: Munich, Bavaria
Joined: August 9, 2007
Well, in a way I used to - because I've used a Pioneer PD-S601 for quite a while. Actually I still own that, but haven't used it for so long, that I'm not sure, whether it would still work.

But otherwise no. I just find turntables more interesting than CD players, while buying records for me always was a bit of a mixed experience, 'cause I was rather picky and hence often enough had to return records I've bought and have these exchanged, after finding out at home, that the exemplars I had got weren't reasonably flawless - and that sometimes even more than once in case of a few titles. Iirc, the worst case was Jean Michel Jarre's "Concerts in China", which I had to return three times, until I finally got a really good exemplar. Quite a nag, as that was a double album, so not only critical listening took quite a while, but there also were four sides with the chance of being flawed - and with my luck the flaws would of course never already occur on the first or second side I would check. Whereas in case of CDs I can't remember even one single case of a technically not ok exemplar.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 04:52:41
MannyE
Audiophile

Posts: 2088
Location: Miami Beach
Joined: March 4, 2001
Haha.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 06:18:26
rindolini
Audiophile

Posts: 584
Location: Munich, Bavaria
Joined: August 9, 2007
Shure V-15 Type III

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 07:43:26
mkane77g
Audiophile

Posts: 183
Location: CA
Joined: February 19, 2017



We like this Denon 103D also.


 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 14:08:12
flood2
Audiophile

Posts: 2552
Joined: January 11, 2011
You realise that the DSD is converted to PCM before the actual D/A conversion? Chord have invested heavily in their proprietary FPGA-based WTA reconstruction filter and that is where the magic happens (particularly with M-scaler where they have a 1 million taps!!!) - not whether you are listening to DSD or PCM derived data.
If you go for the Hugo TT and pair it with an M-Scaler, you would probably attain sonic Nirvana with PCM if the enthusiastic reviews are anything to go by.

There are few devices that do DSD conversion directly since the DAC architecture in most "average" consumer equipment using OTS chips from TI such as the Tascam DA-3000 that John uses (PCM1795) is based on a multi-level Delta-Sigma modulator. Even Sony shifted to the standard multi-bit DAC architecture in their latter SACD players.
Another fact to note is that many commercial recordings are typically done in PCM or at least converted to PCM for the convenience of editing before recoding as DSD. The PCM4202 ADC used in the Tascam DA-3000 is based on a 1 bit modulator - so whether one selects PCM or DSD as the output format, the original recording is effectively done as DSD (1 bit, high oversampling). PCM format is achieved as an additional process on the data.
Any preferences for DSD will be largely based on the output conversion implementation rather than an inherent advantage with DSD.

Chord seem to have achieved astonishing levels of improvement with M-scaler on CD data through careful design of the reconstruction filter so this would suggest that implentation of the reconstruction stage is everything and the data format is secondary.
Theoretically, a 1-bit modulator is inferior to a multi-level Sigma-Delta ADC due to the inability to add optimal levels of dither without saturating the modulator. Lipschitz wrote a paper on this and highlighted the fallacy of adopting DSD as an archival format.
W
Regards Anthony

"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 14:27:04
Vinyl sounds great and it may be better. I bought an ifi nano dac and stream TIDAL so my SOTA turntable sits idle most of the time. To me it's better because my wheelchair bound self is playing music and that's all that matters.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 17:33:36
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
Today I played a vinyl copy of Depeche Mode's "Black Celebration" that I'd bought years ago, but never played.

I've been listening to this recording (on Redbook CD) since 1986. And today I heard it on another, much higher level.

Learn to listen into the noise floor, folks.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 17:52:41
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
"You realise that the DSD is converted to PCM before the actual D/A conversion?"

I briefly wondered about, but did not explore, that question, so thanks.

To be sure, as soon as DSD is converted to PCM any supposed advantage of the format is lost.

Years ago, I had a couple native DSD DACs, including a *discrete* DSD $10K Lampizator. I sold them because my vinyl recordings were still consistently more natural and enjoyable.

The PCM vs. DSD question is pretty much entirely one of trading filtering artifacts for noise. But analog playback has neither issue...

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 18:35:05
mkane77g
Audiophile

Posts: 183
Location: CA
Joined: February 19, 2017
to many abbreviations for this old guy to understand

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 19:20:48
John Elison
Audiophile

Posts: 23874
Location: Central Kentucky
Joined: December 20, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
January 29, 2004
> You realize that the DSD is converted to PCM before the actual D/A conversion?

My DACs and Players do not convert DSD to PCM before converting to analog. You are correct that many other DACs do that, but the best ones don't. In fact, my little handheld FiiO M11 can be set to up-sample all PCM formats to DSD before converting to analog because some people believe that PCM sounds better that way. I own the following DACs and digital players:

Mytek Brooklyn Bridge
TASCAM DA-3000 DSD recorder and player
FiiO M11 Hi-Res Digital Player

All of these DACs and players convert DSD directly to analog without first converting to PCM.

Best regards,
John Elison

 

My CD player and tube DAC..., posted on August 29, 2019 at 19:26:26
Cougar
Audiophile

Posts: 4562
Location: SoCal
Joined: June 25, 2001



Are very nice sounding and I play them a lot but when I put the Teres 255 on, that setup puts the digital set up in check! Not even close!

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 20:34:20
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
If you have a list of DACs that do native DSD256 with no PCM conversion I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 21:15:17
flood2
Audiophile

Posts: 2552
Joined: January 11, 2011
"The PCM vs. DSD question is pretty much entirely one of trading filtering artifacts for noise. But analog playback has neither issue..."

Noise is a reality for all forms of music replay.

Not to be controversial....BUT, vinyl playback has noise in spades PLUS distortion! For fidelity it is a complete non-starter compared to digital. Typical levels of distortion due to the cartridge alone would be between 0.5 to 1% distortion for lateral modulation within the tracking ability range. Vertical modulation distortion with the higher working VTA common with modern MCs is around 2 to 3%. IMD at 15kHz would be of the order of 10%. NOW add on the effect of tracking error distortion. The calculators for tracking distortion (relative to angular tracking error) are relative to 0dB (either 7.07cm/s peak or 10cm/s peak depending on whether the stereo or mono standard was used). Hot cuts will easily double to triple the peak distortion. So with a 9" arm with standard IEC nulls (and a so-called "perfect" alignment) you might expect ~0.6% at 0dB but this will easily increase on hotter cuts to 1.8% or more on hot cuts. Don't forget to add on the additional distortion due to tracking ability.... you see where this is headed!

PCM conversion these days is more commonly done via (usually multi-level) delta-sigma modulators. Any such converter relies on oversampling and noise-shaping to achieve the SNR within the frequency spectrum of interest. It is the amount of noise shaping and the algorithm that determines how much and where the noise is placed within the allowable frequency range relative to Fs. The characteristic rise in noise at higher frequencies approaching Fs is similar between DSD and PCM. The difference is the magnitude of the noise and whether additional filtering is applied to suppress it.

DSD is preferred in most cases I think because of the very gentle analogue filtering applied. No pre-ringing is introduced. However, if a linear phase filter was used at any previous stage after or during the ADC phase, then pre-ringing will exist.

The effect of filtering is the cumulative effect (of phase and magnitude) of all filters in the chain from recording to reproduction.
Regards Anthony

"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 29, 2019 at 21:25:41
flood2
Audiophile

Posts: 2552
Joined: January 11, 2011
I'm a bit out of touch with the latest devices, but I believe the ESS family and perhaps the new AKM devices do native DSD, but I haven't studied any of those device datasheets. The Benchmark DAC3 is one that does native DSD.

If money isn't a problem, I would be buying the Hugo TT and M-Scaler! Forget the DSD/PCM thing - as I mentioned, most commercial recordings will be done in PCM for ease of editing and then converted later. IMO you would be chasing the wrong dragon (as it were!) if you were to choose a native DSD decoder.

FWIW, I am more than happy with my Transport/Grimm CC1/NAD M51 driving a Bryston 4BSST and MartinLogan Summits. I would like the option of a minimum phase filter on the M51, but it really doesn't affect the "reality" of the sound I get out of my MartinLogans. If I won Lotto, I would buy the Chord combo in a heartbeat because I respect good engineering!
Regards Anthony

"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on August 31, 2019 at 18:06:59
PaulF70
Audiophile

Posts: 1386
Location: Midwest
Joined: June 30, 2006
Yes, I am indeed aware of all that.

I believe this says it best: With analog, distortion is layered on top of the music, while with digital, it's woven in to it.

 

Women, posted on September 1, 2019 at 03:35:24
Story
Audiophile

Posts: 10302
Location: NJ
Joined: December 11, 2000
the analogy could be said (without any intended insult) to be like 2 beautiful women.

One is mainly residing on the emotional level, but very well 'equipped'. Fun loving and intellectually interesting with a few good stories. Likes to go wild once in a while. Communication level excellent

The other is deceptively pretty and understated, with nice hair that isn't fussed over much. Inspiring, warm and cuddly, smooth and relaxing, very intelligent w/ a few good stories. Occasional fire. Communication level outstanding.

They both bring a different perspective to the party, and then eventually make themselves at home at the right house.



 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on October 23, 2020 at 08:48:14
Ogh
Audiophile

Posts: 26
Location: Oslo
Joined: November 5, 2004
I recently invested in a better digital chain, and I am satisfied with my new Teac NT-505. Analog - direct LP playback - is still king to my ears (with a good analog playback chain). DSD digital comes quite close but can't beat direct analog. I can compare exactly, the direct sound vs the DSD recording on the Tascam. The NT-505 is a big step up from my former digital solution (Logitech Touch as streamer, Tascam DA-3000 as Dac), although there is still a way to go, for digital. I disagree with people saying that this type of recording is so good (technically) that humans cannot hear the difference. I do. But I agree that digital has become much better, over the years. The Teac also supports MQA, besides DSD, and this makes streaming (Tidal masters) better than I have heard it before, in our home.

 

RE: Vinyl Vs. Digital, posted on November 3, 2020 at 05:23:22
mcgjohn@yahoo.com
Industry Professional

Posts: 501
Location: Midwest
Joined: February 5, 2008
to the original poster, a blanket statement of analog vs. digital is pointless unless you put some better descriptors on it. do you mean analog LP vs. 16/44.1 (CD's bit rate) or are you talking something else?

The analog LP will usually outperform the CD bit rate, until you get into some higher sampling rates, larger bit depths and master clocks. As Bill noted, 15 ips 2 track will smoke either one, and if you go to 1/2 inch tape at 30, it becomes mind blowing with a pure feed no effects chains added to signal path.



 

RE: Who cares...nt, posted on November 3, 2020 at 07:33:55
Ogh
Audiophile

Posts: 26
Location: Oslo
Joined: November 5, 2004
It is not a case of some truth written in stone - like analog is best. This would be like repeating the CD slogan "perfect sound forever". The terrain is changing, and we need to adjust the map.

 

Page processed in 0.066 seconds.