[Devil Doc]

All generalizations are wrong. What do you mean by "better"? Easier to playback? Nope. Better sounding? Arguable and gear dependent. For someone like me who is 29 years old and has owned zero records and never touched a record player I can't imagine going through the hastle of buying a turntable, finding records, changing them, and storing them.

Once you've used a music server and can instantly hear any song in your collection it's hard to go back.

When I bought my first DAC I expressed my apprehension of using new technology. He replied, "You old guys need to knock it off. It ain't that hard." Well, I'll tell you the same thing, young fella. It ain't that hard and certainly worth it.

Doc.

[Wayner]

All generalizations are wrong. What do you mean by "better"? Easier to playback? Nope. Better sounding? Arguable and gear dependent. For someone like me who is 29 years old and has owned zero records and never touched a record player I can't imagine going through the hastle of buying a turntable, finding records, changing them, and storing them.

Once you've used a music server and can instantly hear any song in your collection it's hard to go back.

kip_,

It's kind of all about what you grew up with. Perhaps our generation is the "electro-mechanical" era, but we also had some of the best music ever made. The first generation of rock and roll came out of this stuff. This was the foundation for all other music that followed.

Wayner

[rbbert]

kip_,

It's kind of all about what you grew up with. Perhaps our generation is the "electro-mechanical" era, but we also had some of the best music ever made. The first generation of rock and roll came out of this stuff. This was the foundation for all other music that followed.

Wayner

Except for blues, jazz and bluegrass.   

[kip_]

kip_,

It's kind of all about what you grew up with. Perhaps our generation is the "electro-mechanical" era, but we also had some of the best music ever made. The first generation of rock and roll came out of this stuff. This was the foundation for all other music that followed.

Wayner

Sure, and I agree with you, wayner, but making a blanket statement that analog is superior to digital sounded like pretty blatant flame bait to me. I was just saying, that for me, I don't think I can ever do without the convenience of digital.

[Mitsuman]

Sure, and I agree with you, wayner, but making a blanket statement that analog is superior to digital sounded like pretty blatant flame bait to me. I was just saying, that for me, I don't think I can ever do without the convenience of digital.

No one is debating that analog is more convenient than digital. It's about sound, not convenience.

[Freo-1]

No one is debating that analog is more convenient than digital. It's about sound, not convenience.

Right, which means hi res digital is closer to live music than older, outdated, analog sources.   

Meters, measurements, and spectrum analyzers will validate this.  Now, what one prefers is a whole different set of arguments that has NO right answers.

[Mitsuman]

Right, which means hi res digital is closer to live music than older, outdated, analog sources.   

Meters, measurements, and spectrum analyzers will validate this.  Now, what one prefers is a whole different set of arguments that has NO right answers.

Saying it with conviction, doesn't make it true. 

[Art_Chicago]

Sure, and I agree with you, wayner, but making a blanket statement that analog is superior to digital sounded like pretty blatant flame bait to me. I was just saying, that for me, I don't think I can ever do without the convenience of digital.

kip
well I have all my music on my Mac, going thru ATV to AVA DAC and controlling it by Remote app from the iphone. Sound is great imho.  Guess what -- last week I picked up a technics 1200, already bought a bunch sealed LPs (classical) 3 bucks/each and will be shipping my t8 to Frank to install a phono stage. Yes, extra hassle and money. But I am getting sick of those 99% CDs with a very compressed sound. Besides, jazz CDs are usually purely remastered with a rare exception, so I will be getting used or reissued LP of jazz masters. I am "only" 10 years older 

[doug s.]

Right, which means hi res digital is closer to live music than older, outdated, analog sources.   

Meters, measurements, and spectrum analyzers will validate this...

your EARS will walidate that analog is closer to live music. 

doug s.

[AgentOrange]

I grew up on analog.  I like the sound of an LP and have more than most and a system I never had back then that is incredible.  I do like my records.

On the other hand, computer audio (if set up right ) is damn good.
Keep in mind that ALL digital music is computer playback.  If you do it from an ipod or a high end CD player,it is computer playback.
To that end it makes sense if you think about it that a real computer set up right feeding data to a quality outboard DAC should exceed any other digital device.  I find that to be true.

I have a system that does 'computer' playback well and I use it 75% of the time.
Does it rival my analog system?  - Yes, but it falls short.

Most times the people who argue over the two don't have the systems to tell the difference as it is minor, but real.  As a hobby as one tries for the best.

Few have the systems or the patience to tell the difference.

That is good -> play the tunes and have some fun.

[JerryM]

Trying to stay OT...

Can we consider the source of this *science*?

The author of the article being discussed maintains a page of his own. Here is Monty's demo pages.

Really? Are we to believe this fine Gent before we believe all of the great Hi Res information available to us right here on AC?

Maybe there needs to be more defined and accepted parameters of *science*. I'd be curious to know what the author of the article used as his listening control before I consider his thoughts. Especially if his thoughts are considered science.

JMHO, YMMV, etc.

Have fun,

Jerry

[simon wagstaff]

In my experience it is the bit depth that makes more of a difference than the sampling rate. 24/48 is significantly better to my ears than 16/44.1. I don't hear much difference if any moving to 24/96. I think the main improvement is moving the digital filter further away from the "audible" band at 20khz. I am sure I don't hear much above 16 khz, old fart that I am.

The differences to me with higher rez material is the expansion of the soundstage and smoothness of the midrange. I listen to a lot of high rez audience recordings. the audience chatter, that is way down in level, becomes much more annoying with high rez recordings.

Somebody previously mentioned the increased resolution of reverb decay. I agree and feel this is due to the bit depth, rather than the sampling rate.

[Diamond Dog]

Perhaps our generation is the "electro-mechanical" era, but we also had some of the best music ever made. The first generation of rock and roll came out of this stuff. This was the foundation for all other music that followed.

Wayner

Uh, Mr. Wayner, there is a group of German gentlemen wearing powdered wigs outside who wish to discuss your comment with you...

D.D.

[Freo-1]

Saying it with conviction, doesn't make it true. 

Of course it is.  Physics dores not bend to personal tastes, and the physics is clearly in digital's favor.

[Freo-1]

Trying to stay OT...

Can we consider the source of this *science*?

The author of the article being discussed maintains a page of his own. Here is Monty's demo pages.

Really? Are we to believe this fine Gent before we believe all of the great Hi Res information available to us right here on AC?

Maybe there needs to be more defined and accepted parameters of *science*. I'd be curious to know what the author of the article used as his listening control before I consider his thoughts. Especially if his thoughts are considered science.

JMHO, YMMV, etc.

Have fun,

Jerry

You have gotten to the crux of this debate.  Without proper testing and validation from a well respected body of experts, it's all bollocks.

These are the same types od disagreements audiophiles have with amps sounding the same or not, vinyl vs. digital, etc that go round and round. 

Physics and meters tell us one set of truths, while listening often tells us different and varied results.  It's fun to debate up to a point, after which it gets old fast.

[TONEPUB]

What makes this such a moot point is how many of you are going to actually purchase your whole music collection again as high res downloads?  I've got almost 10,000 CD's.  It's not happening here.

There's so many issues that aren't even being discussed, it's just another topic that makes everyone crabby.  I've had the opportunity to listen to enough digital, analog, high res etc, that I can be very happy with whatever format it's released on.

[Freo-1]

What makes this such a moot point is how many of you are going to actually purchase your whole music collection again as high res downloads?  I've got almost 10,000 CD's.  It's not happening here.

There's so many issues that aren't even being discussed, it's just another topic that makes everyone crabby.  I've had the opportunity to listen to enough digital, analog, high res etc, that I can be very happy with whatever format it's released on.

+1

It's good to understand the pros and cons of all the formats, but after a certaain point,  it is moot.  Just get the best system you can that works for you and your tastes (and it's OK if we all do not agree on what's best..hell..if we did..THAT would be a big worry).   

[Mitsuman]

Of course it is.  Physics dores not bend to personal tastes, and the physics is clearly in digital's favor.

Last time I checked, music wasn't created to serve physics, meters, analyzers, etc., only my ears. 

[Freo-1]

Last time I checked, music wasn't created to serve physics, meters, analyzers, etc., only my ears. 

You are just trying to stir the pot.   

None of our equipment would work without physics.  The physics involved with hi res digital is proof positive that from a science and measurement standpoint, better overall performance will be achieved. 

Now, I get the fact you prefer vinyl, and that's cool.  I have owned some pretty expensive and well regarded vinyl rigs over the years, and had great enjoyment from them.  However, as my musical tastes shifted more towards classical, and technology on the digital end improved, went away from it.  The noise floor with vinyl and classical is too high (for me), and cannot tolerate it.

[Mitsuman]

You are just trying to stir the pot.   

None of our equipment would work without physics.  The physics involved with hi res digital is proof positive that from a science and measurement standpoint, better overall performance will be achieved. 

Now, I get the fact you prefer vinyl, and that's cool.  I have owned some pretty expensive and well regarded vinyl rigs over the years, and had great enjoyment from them.  However, as my musical tastes shifted more towards classical, and technology on the digital end improved, went away from it.  The noise floor with vinyl and classical is too high (for me), and cannot tolerate it.

Maybe just a little.

But seriously, re-read what I wrote. I would be a fool to believe that our equipment would work without physics. That's not what I said.