[konut]

[
Well, thanks, but I believe you are missing the point of my post.  I simply don't discern the more euphonic presentation of vinyl that you claim when comparing an LP to a CD.  That has nothing to do with preference. I don't prefer one medium over the other.

 Just because you can't discern it doesn't mean its not there. You're one of the lucky ones.

[TheChairGuy]

TCG,

Have you ever listen to a fully tweaked Squeezebox in your system?

Raj

Raj
I have the utmost of respect for the integrity of both Wayne/Bolder and Steve/Empirical Audio - I assume you mean these two gents modded Squeezebox's. Nope, neither have been heard in my home listening zone.  But, your question is rather like asking what shade of gray did I like...rather than 'did I compare an apple to an opossum' .  It's not difficult to hear a large range of CD-based setups at any show or audiophile function, it's far less frequent to hear a TT-based set-up.   If you haven't exposed yourself to a bunch, you are missing out on a lot of great music....while I am likely missing out on just another shade of gray.

No matter how great the playback, and I'll assume computer based hard drives are the be-all-and-end-all in CD fidelity, you can't correct the flaws of the first 50% - the recording.  The top end/treble is ragged on any CD-based playback - for me (and I speak only for me as everyone does hear different things in music), automatically disqualifying it as a high fidelity source.  It is with considerable displeasure I find that the turntable, wrought with so many annoying traits in itself, gives a truer rendition of music.  Whatever it lacks in low end extension, dynamic range, additional noise and convenience - is made up for with superior timbre & tone, and more natural midrange and, most significantly, natural (as in, like real music) treble.  I am hooked listening to 75% of vinyl and perhaps 10-15% of CD.

Now, DVD-A is very different...apparently 192,000 samples per second and Meridian Lossless Packing is mighty beneficial to augmenting already excellent resolution and signal-to-noise and dynamic range of CD....while re-creating treble sounds with far more naturalness. I'm 43, with very good cholesterol numbers, average blood pressure, am a non-smoker and always have been, the correct weight for my height and frame and I get regular chiropractic adjustments - I hear treble very acutely likely because of this all; and CD never gets it right. 

Larry/lcrim
I didn't start/author this particular topic (member 'mdfoy' did) - and it's not at all personal with me.  Not in the least.  In fact, it's as objective a stance as I have in audio as I've heard both many CD and vinyl-based systems.  Adding tubes to CD is quite helpful to soften/rolloff the ragged high's and using single driver speakers creates a natural high frequency filter - eliminating the most objectionable part of CD performance before it can irritate much - whatever your playback source

I'm not knocking either (I use lots of tubes myself as you know); you're certainly entitled to spend your audio dollars any way in which you desire without rancor.

I know I expose myself to much heated response for my views, which appear to be very fixated, but they are in fact not.  I am a remarkably pliable/flexible individual - I am just very pragmatic about certain subjects and it raises certain emotions in many.  Forgive me for doing so, it is not my intent - my views are no doubt a small slice of the music loving public, yet they are mine to share 

You must at least admit, I express them creatively and with flair, at least - even if you don't agree with them.
 

[Scotty]

TheChairGuy,can you more precisely articulate what is wrong, to your ears with the treble from CD and DVD-A sources? To my ears, on my system, they are VERY similar, except in the case where my record has had the leading edge transients worn off. I should have used the LAST products twenty-five years ago.Explicative deleted.
I have similar high frequency extension and attack most of the time. Depending on the recording, both CD and vinyl sound treble sound fairly realistic much of the time.
I am interested in how you would characterize the differences and short-comings
you hear between mediums?
Scotty

[blakep]

If you prefer the kind of euphonic distortion that vinyl renders than you might be able to add a tube pre or amp, to a digital rig, to get the best of both worlds.

I don't have euphonic distortion from my vinyl rig. Maybe I'm not doing vinyl correctly.

You may not think you have euphonic distortion but, by definition, you do if you use vinyl. Its easily measurable.
http://stereophile.com/reference/406howard/
Its no coincidence that the term 'musicalty' is used to describe the effect. Just as musical instrurments are identified by their harmonic structure, vinyl adds a certain amount of harmonic 'enhancement' that many find pleasing to the ears. I'm not saying its bad. Its just not as accurate as digital. And theres no reason to be shy about admitting you like it.

Konut: It seems a bit odd to me that you would make an argument for vinyl adding euphonic distortion and then reference an article which makes absolutely no reference to vinyl (at least in my quick perusal of the article) but, in fact, refers to distortions created by amplifiers. Perhaps you could further enlighten us.

Quickly peruse this.
http://www.furious.com/perfect/vinyl49.html

or this
http://www.skepticforum.com/rss.php?t=85

Well, I had a look at the first one:

http://www.furious.com/perfect/vinyl49.html

and it supports your argument about vinyl creating euphonic distortion about as much as the first article you posted about amplifiers creating such distortions. That is to say it does nothing to support it.

As to the second one, it's so difficult to read that I can't be bothered to, especially in light of the fact that the first two articles are not related in any way to the point you're trying to make. Perhaps a course in reading comprehension is in order for you?

If you're going to troll, you should at least try to bat better than .333 with your arguments (the .333 is perhaps being generous).

[eric the red]

TCG,

Have you ever listen to a fully tweaked Squeezebox in your system?

Raj

Raj
I have the utmost of respect for the integrity of both Wayne/Bolder and Steve/Empirical Audio - I assume you mean these two gents modded Squeezebox's. Nope, neither have been heard in my home listening zone.  But, your question is rather like asking what shade of gray did I like...rather than 'did I compare an apple to an opossum' .  It's not difficult to hear a large range of CD-based setups at any show or audiophile function, it's far less frequent to hear a TT-based set-up.   If you haven't exposed yourself to a bunch, you are missing out on a lot of great music....while I am likely missing out on just another shade of gray.

No matter how great the playback, and I'll assume computer based hard drives are the be-all-and-end-all in CD fidelity, you can't correct the flaws of the first 50% - the recording.  The top end/treble is ragged on any CD-based playback - for me (and I speak only for me as everyone does hear different things in music), automatically disqualifying it as a high fidelity source.  It is with considerable displeasure I find that the turntable, wrought with so many annoying traits in itself, gives a truer rendition of music.  Whatever it lacks in low end extension, dynamic range, additional noise and convenience - is made up for with superior timbre & tone, and more natural midrange and, most significantly, natural (as in, like real music) treble.  I am hooked listening to 75% of vinyl and perhaps 10-15% of CD.

Now, DVD-A is very different...apparently 192,000 samples per second and Meridian Lossless Packing is mighty beneficial to augmenting already excellent resolution and signal-to-noise and dynamic range of CD....while re-creating treble sounds with far more naturalness. I'm 43, with very good cholesterol numbers, average blood pressure, am a non-smoker and always have been, the correct weight for my height and frame and I get regular chiropractic adjustments - I hear treble very acutely likely because of this all; and CD never gets it right. 

Larry/lcrim
I didn't start/author this particular topic (member 'mdfoy' did) - and it's not at all personal with me.  Not in the least.  In fact, it's as objective a stance as I have in audio as I've heard both many CD and vinyl-based systems.  Adding tubes to CD is quite helpful to soften/rolloff the ragged high's and using single driver speakers creates a natural high frequency filter - eliminating the most objectionable part of CD performance before it can irritate much - whatever your playback source

I'm not knocking either (I use lots of tubes myself as you know); you're certainly entitled to spend your audio dollars any way in which you desire without rancor.

I know I expose myself to much heated response for my views, which appear to be very fixated, but they are in fact not.  I am a remarkably pliable/flexible individual - I am just very pragmatic about certain subjects and it raises certain emotions in many.  Forgive me for doing so, it is not my intent - my views are no doubt a small slice of the music loving public, yet they are mine to share 

You must at least admit, I express them creatively and with flair, at least - even if you don't agree with them.
 

What exactly in a nut shell are you trying to say post after post after post? That you prefer the sound of vinyl over digital? No offense but can you at all understand why some people here think you may have beat this and a few other horses to death many times over regarding this subject? i.e. WE GET IT!

[TheChairGuy]

Scotty
Nope, I can't really articulate the treble differences well - nor measure it - but I hear the differences clearly. It wasn't quite as noticeable when I didn't listen much to classical.  But, now that I do, it's all the more obvious.

Please know that I am not citing any superiority of my hearing - I had a bud years ago that sensed phase problems immediately.  He'd hear something, reverse a few leads and settle back into his listening chair with a gentle 'ahhhh' afterwards. Me, I'd just shrug my shoulders wonderin' what the hell he got up for 

Further, these treble differences may well evaporate in a few short years for me. No matter how well I treat myself/my body, the ravages of age include a precipitous decline in high frequency hearing (especially for men)

EDIT: Well after question posed, I realized it might be due to many factors.  You may not hear differences to to age or auditory condition, of course, of you may not hear it with most dome tweeters.  You may, frankly, not care at all...treble quality just doesn't make a difference to many (hence the popularity of single driver speakers....but that is something that sounds so wrong to me as it sounds like you're only getting 70% of the music with single drivers/horns, etc.).  So, there may well be objective and subjective reasons at the core of it.   Treble for me makes the illusion of an orchestra or band real, and the music exciting...I've yet to hear CD treble that made me boogie yet.   

eric the red
Point well taken - I am more aware then you might think of over-articulating my position/beliefs. Note that the topic title is 'vinyl vs digital performance $' and I addressed vinyl, CD and DVD-A relative strengths (to me, and only me) in my post you've quoted.  Member 'mdfoy' asked for input and I gave mine.

Whereas, your first and only post in this topic is made to take a dump on me...rather than offer up anything tangible to the discussion at hand. This is something you could have more genteely done in a PM to me; I am very accessible that way.

Do ya' get the difference?  My post has something to do with the topic; yours is an excuse to flog me in full public view. The difference is rather important to understanding and maturing as a person.

[mdfoy]

TheChairGuy,

Why did you squeal on me?

[eric the red]

As macrojack said: "Most topics have been flogged to death and ground to dust. What a bunch of hopeless, repetitive geezers we have become." Carry on with the crusade TCG.

[Wayner]

I found "The Doors" today (the one with Light My Fire) and the album sounds better than the CD counterpart. No one ever played this as I had trouble getting it on the spindle, no pops, no clicks. These are the moments that I'm torn between the quality of one format vs the other. I did have to cough up $6 for it. Apparently, there is extreme demand for used albums at my local haunt as the prices seem to go up and up.

W

[konut]

Konut, IMO, it is an improper generalization to universally apply an adjective such as euphonic to every listener and system. It appears that it is not possible for you to accept that others may own gear that produces sound differently than what you have experienced...or that other listeners may perceive things differently from you. The adjective euphonic is subjective, therefore there will always be differing interpretations of what is and what is not euphonic, and varying degrees of the term.

If you want to discuss measured distortion, then that is another matter entirely, and one with which I would not have a differing opinion.

From my perspective, this discussion has run its course.

I'm not applying euphonic to every listener and system. The inherant physics of vinyl reproduction includes limitations on the signal than what was in the original master, unless the master was of lower quality than what vinyl reproduction is capable of. That many enjoy those limitations is self evident by those who say that vinyl is more musical.That is the context for the use of the word euphonic. You are correct that one persons euphony is another persons caucaphany.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphony
I'd venture to say that no one owns a system like mine, or has had the exact same experience with equipment that I have. It was never my assertion that everyone hears the same thing that I do. On the contrary. My assertion is precisely the opposite. Everyone hears things differently. Both vinyl and digital have their strengths and weaknesses.  I was only trying to point out those strenghts and weaknesses so that people who are not familiar with them would be able to identify them when they heard them. It is up to the individual to determine preference. What I find tiresome is that some people, ahum ahum, claim their preference is 'better', not just  different'. Its like theres some kind of contest and they claim victory. OK, you win......feel better now?

[rollo]

Konut, IMO, it is an improper generalization to universally apply an adjective such as euphonic to every listener and system. It appears that it is not possible for you to accept that others may own gear that produces sound differently than what you have experienced...or that other listeners may perceive things differently from you. The adjective euphoric is subjective, therefore there will always be differing interpretations of what is and what is not euphoric, and varying degrees of the term.

If you want to discuss measured distortion, then that is another matter entirely, and one with which I would not have a differing opinion.

From my perspective, this discussion has run its course.

I'm not applying euphoric to every listener and system. The inherant physics of vinyl reproduction includes limitations on the signal than what was in the original master, unless the master was of lower quality than what vinyl reproduction is capable of. That many enjoy those limitations is self evident by those who say that vinyl is more musical.That is the context for the use of the word euphoric. You are correct that one persons euphony is another persons cacophony.
http://en.wiped.org/wiki/Euphony
I'd venture to say that no one owns a system like mine, or has had the exact same experience with equipment that I have. It was never my assertion that everyone hears the same thing that I do. On the contrary. My assertion is precisely the opposite. Everyone hears things differently. Both vinyl and digital have their strengths and weaknesses.  I was only trying to point out those strength's and weaknesses so that people who are not familiar with them would be able to identify them when they heard them. It is up to the individual to determine preference. What I find tiresome is that some people, ahum ahum, claim their preference is 'better', not just  different'. Its like theres some kind of contest and they claim victory. OK, you win......feel better now?

 

   Hey Man,
       
         Very well said. There is no clear cut winner. The emotional impact of the presentation is the key issue. We all have experienced goosebumps from one time or another from both formats.
           For me the Linn LP12 makes me dance or sing [not very well I might add] and the Lector CDP7t does the same, just not as often.
            Remember a poor quality recording either vinyl or CD is still a poor recording. Both formats can suck at times. Put on that well engineered album or CD and enjoy.
             At our Audiosyndrome club meetings we have compared numerous times the same program material on vinyl and CD. Some preferred vinyl, some preferred CD. Personally the vinyl did it for me most of the times but not all the time.
          There are so many variables involved this discussion is silly already, OK guys let me have it.
 
  rollo

[lazydays]

I find it very interesting that LP and CD lovers actually have time capsules with their collection. I have some recordings that go back to the fifties and I have some from last year such as Neil Young's Prairie Wind. Boy, has the LP gone through a revolution! On that note, I look at my collection and have guessed that the average age of most of the albums centers around 1979-1980. That is roughly 25 years since the 12" 33 1/3 album has really been around, of course +/- a few years. In that time period, it is evident listening to the recordings in a chronological fashion that the technology simply got better and better. There were better and bigger studio recorders, microphones, processors, cable, cutting machines, guitars, drums and so on. Everything improved. The sound of the LP kind of hit the ceiling where the technology couldn't take it much higher anymore. Today, records still come (new) warped, off center, scratched and bubbled as they always did.

The evolution of the turntable, cartridge and tonearm have also made fantastic leaps, especially as of late. There are many models of really good RIAA preamps as well.

LP's, like CD's, have a sort of filter mechanism, however, it's at the other end of the audio spectrum. I'm talking about the RIAA compensation curve used to restore the lowest bass notes that simply couldn't be lathed onto the disc without the tonearm/cartridge launching off of the record surface. This is where I think the LP has it's short comings. That doesn't mean I'm not going to listen to them, because they are less than perfect, I love them for what they are. I love the fact that this 100 year old format can deliver such sonic realism. I play records every night. I use all three of the turntables I have set-up. They all have their own virtues and flaws but that's fine. They're all damn old too, just like me.

The CD has gone through a revolution as well. I remember buying my first player (a Fisher)  and I still have the first CD I ever bought. It was by Jefferson Starship called "Knee deep in the Hoopla" with the hit song "We built this city on rock and roll". That CD was dated 1985. Here we are soon coming into the 25 years of CD and look at the evolution again. Compare the early CD's to today's releases. They really don't compare very well, just like early to late day vinyl. The CD is now coming into it's own and unfortunately, the current generation has chosen to be satisfied with a less than capable format with the flourishing of the Ipod. The new CD players have improved with better transports, D/A converters and playback equipment.

I think we all have examples of great and terrible recordings in either format. Of course, this debate will never end and hopefully the improvements to both formats will never end either.

What's my point? I don't have one.  aa

with your post refering to the evolution of CD playback quality, you are so right. I look back at the many steps in the evolutionary chain of CD's (and players as well). I think that when they came out with the HDCD things started to change for the better. Then a few others marketed 20 bit recordings and even 24 bit recordings. My two redbook players handle these two very well, but a standard player dosn't do it as well. I've actually got a small few that sound better on redbook than the same thing in SACD. So I'm in complete agreement with you here.
    Yet at the same time some folks really got serious about making good affordable cartridges for the masses. Then this guy that owns VPI drops a bombshell on the entire playback industry with this little gem called a "Scout." Now everybody else is bring forth some really nice equipment that's pretty much ready to fly right outta the box (Music Hall #7, the new tables from Marantz and Clearaudio are a few). All the while a few folks have gone so far as to give us some pretty good phono preamps at a reasonable price to sooth our ears (Grado, Graham, Bellari, George Wright to name a few). And now the cat's outta the bag, and we get more nice cartridges from all over the planet. I still listen to my CD players in one form or another most everyday, but when it's serious I take that silk scarf off the turntable and smile.
gary

[shep]

This is making me crazy I have boxes full of great LP's that I haven't heard for years!
I WANNA! so HELP! somebody tell me about Bang and O. TT's (tangentials). Which models to prefer, which to avoid. They haven't been "discovered" yet like the Technics or other vintage. I see a bunch on E-bay.
Please!

[Scott F.]

Shep,

If it were my money and considering where you live, I'd invest in a used Rega, Systemdek or Ariston. For under 200 pounds you can pick one up off eBay.uk. By the time you buy a B&O (which was never a very good table especially with the tangential arm) and sink even more money into one of their expensive, proprietary cartridges, you'd be less money with a different table.

One of the guys here on AC picked up on eBay a Systemdek IIX with a new cart for 190 pounds just last week. Now he's got a darned nice sounding table with a few upgrade options like acrylic platter, Rega tonearm rewire, motor upgrades, that type stuff. He had several to choose from.

...just my 2pence

[shep]

The other option was a Technics tangential. I had a love affair with a Souther arm I like the plug and play aspect (which the Souther certainly wasn't!) I don't want to go back to tweaking arms and carts! I've heard some think the B and O is under rated; ?? True the carts are expensive, especially from Sound Forge. Now if someone just happened to live in France and wanted a great collection of vinyl...I could drop this whole thing!

[rollo]

Shep,
             Do not sell your vinyl period. Buy a TT already. Your vinyl collection will bring you back in time.
              When the stylus hits the LP for the first time in a long time it will be Deja Vu all over again. You will like it allot.

  rollo

[shep]

I know, that's what I'm afraid of!

[WEEZ]

ye gads, shep...even the thought of selling vinyl makes me cringe.

[rollo]

I know, that's what I'm afraid of!

 

Shep,

          So whats a Franc or two your a music lover. You will thank us later. Vinyl! Vinyl! Vinyl! going once going twice SOLD.

   rollo

[shep]

NONONO! you guys are evil! so send me a nice TT and a decent phono stage and we'll talk about it  Here's the deal: (Moderator turn thy vigilant ear elsewhere) just cause I'm such a wimp..
I send (after I figure the cost of mailing) packages of say 10-20 GREAT LPs at a time (and I'm talking great condition and great music; some collectors items) to the lucky guy who has a super tt/cart. with the patience of a saint to burn them nice and slowly on cd (with a paper saying what is on it!) and YOU get to keep the LPs!! aa. Can't refuse can you...you get absolute gems in Jazz from the 70's and 80's, with a nice smattering of pop like Joni M. Ricky Lee, etc. OR you can have classical. This includes rarities from the late 50's and 60's (some shady dogs) all handled with loving care and only played on the best (of the time) Think on it...I can't afford a decent analogue front end and I'm perfectly happy in blissfull ignorance of what I'm missing (provided lovingly tranferred to cd) aa aa
Sorry to goso faroff topic