[TheChairGuy]

Russell Dawkins - here's the Tim de P interview in it's entirety http://www.ear-usa.com/timdeparavicini.htm

Wally King - I may be in the minority, but I can't listen to CD for any classical/orchestral except at very low volumes.  Violins, violas, piano, flute and other treble instruments sound so wrong to me, I can't handle it.  I only listen critically to this type of music on vinyl.

I totally dig most Pop music on CD....nothing like the guttural bass and dynamic whack of pop and reggae on vinyl.  I'm not looking to hear nuance and detail with pop and reggae...I'm looking for outright fun and grunt.  So, in my case at least, you made an adequate assumption.

But, I listen to vinyl 75% of the time on all genre's.

[Russell Dawkins]

Thanks, TCG, I read the whole page, and the JA interview. I could not find the references I remember. I think it was a little earlier, like 1988, but it doesn't matter much.

[1000a]

On the bright side the fan base for jazz and classical music increases in direct porportion to the amount of audio-p guys who are continuingly disscusted when coming home with yet another new pop rock CD (no lp version) they were excited to hear who run to take out the trash can to stop their ears from bleeding and hide their tears and rage from the family unit!

Part of it for me was getting older but as soon as I graduated from Kenwood to NAD, and purchased my first CDP a Phillips CD960 in 1987 (thank God I did not skimp) jazz was becoming much more interesting to me and my Pioneer PL10 entry TT still sounded great.  And when I went to better gear, still more urge for better recordings.  It really is not the music its the recordings as many have said.

I'll ditto if its done well 16/44 can be very good (I second make better recordings) and let the audio industry and DIY people continue to unravel the mystery of how to deliver it.  I have many new pop CDS that are very good thank GOD, and improving my system resolution and room has even improved many I thought were sub standard only to find out they were quite good (and that is my job if I care). 

I do find it interesting the digital world it is still young come on my dads 78s sounded well not so good too me and that era was over!  From the stuff I am reading now the Digital world started at NOS, then went to Oversample, then later to Upsample, we are back to a reinvestigation of NOS (recent).  Now I am reading more and more from people like http://www.LessLoss.com (oversample and get the clock out of the transport period) and Lynn Olson http://www.nutshellhifi.com/ (really interesting reading here) in reviewing the Monarchy M24 DAC http://www.monarchyaudio.com/M24new/Olson/M24review.html is strongly infavor of oversampling and thinks the NOS stuff a crude implementation/ he says that thing is incredible has no problem playing beside the best of the best TTs. I also thought I read that it took a very long time for people to even realize there was jitter , hell we are just getting started. 

Being a 30 yr photographer 10 yrs into digital there are still some sitiuations where digital can not begin delv. the smoothness that film can (its hideous, and it will take alot to overcome that particular pitfall yrs++++++) my guess 10 more yrs minimum maybe 15. yrs., but the average person, not a photographer the same people who think we are nuts for using TTs, would never see it, unless you showed em.   and then when you did they'd go that does not bother me!

So the good news is there are numerous people pushing and digging deeper and deeper into jitter, where exactly the clock belongs (LessLoss), HD music streamed (5-6 diff ways min) and how to make it great, again NOS DACs reinvestigated, Upsampling DACs still being worked on and again deeper more enlightened journey into Oversampling DACs.  Also we have a better understanding of the importance of impedance matching.  Competion is certainly driving great gear down to affordable prices.  Look how the Stereovox HDVX just killed the Illuminate D60, and now there is a Stereovox VX2 that is supposed to really outdue the HDVX so we are getting there.  The D60 vs the Stereovox was a monumental change for the extrnal DAC people.  We even have people who refuse to try a toslink cable even when certain designers strongly incourage its use with their DACs, that kind of close mindedness does not move things forward.  Lynn Olson says the very best stereos he has ever heard are always ground up DIY and have almost no piece of commercal gear in them at all, implying that DIY people can push past the people that have to tend to bottom lines.

Hell I remember my Joe Jackson Lps sounded much better than my Allman Brother Lps, guess what the older Joe Jackson CDs still sound better than the older Allman Brothers Cds.  I had my emotion favorites then and I have em now but getting them on the same audio quality page has always been an issue.  My reel to reel easily bested my cassette deck but it did have a lot of hiss and I did not like that one bit but boy was the rest of it nice you bet!  Is it really that different now, or is it possible our hindsight is twisting our perpective. 

Really digital has come a very long way (yeah some of it is just crap) but it can be pretty damn good if effort is applied, and my God we have tons of choices the medium continues to evolve and rapidly.

Lets face it the suits run the world which drinks reality TV for food , and a search for TTs brings up these incredible pieces of gear from all over the world many from mom and pop "So we are never gonna beat the suits but we will never join em either".  Hunter Thompson, I think?

[miklorsmith]

Nice post!   

[nathanm]

Based upon what type of sound I personally enjoy hearing (although it doesn't usually exist on most recordings) it would actually be cheaper and less time consuming to achieve that sound than it would to do a very high production value scenario like what dayglow described where each element is carefully honed and put in place.  Give me a stereo microphone and plenty of room tone and I am one happy camper.  I will get excited if I can hear somebody talk in the background on a record, just because it gives a sense of space if only for a brief moment.  Everything sounds 10 times more realistic that way.  But it's never on record usually.  To me it's more work to generate a pristine track but one with warts can actually sound better.  I like it when the snares vibrate sympathetically with the guitar, but you never hear that on record.  The extraneous noises and ambience makes it sound big and alive but that isn't to most people's taste I guess so they go through all that extra work to get rid of it.  To me the problem with music has always been the fact that they overprocess everything and even though it comes out very impressive and very polished, I can't help but wish I could really hear into what actually happened in the studio.  Fake can be good, there's no doubt, but I wish there was some more dirt injected into things.

[martyo]

I agree with nathanm, which is why I prefer live recordings. I know there isn't always that choice and there is a certain degree of production with live too, but particularly in 2 channel it's way less processed.
Right now I'm listening to Keith Jarrett and all his moaning and grunting and hootin' are loud and clear. After a Gary Peacock bass solo he sniffs and it's there. With many performers there's that energy when they are playing, rather than recording. Personally, lately, I've been finding some pretty good sounding Cd's and DVD's(in 2 channel), A couple Keith Jarretts, Alison Kruass, Bela Fleck, Joss Stone, Suede, McCoy Tyner to name a few. Not perfect, but real and alive enough that I forget about the stereo and get caught up in the music and for me that's the deal. I've also had a few that were very compressed with a terrible mix too. IMO there does seem to be a consistency with alot of artists, regardless of whether it is towards good or poor sound. Just thought I'd throw in my 5 cents worth. BTW, very good thread.

Marty

[Wayner]

You guys forget that it's the bozo recording engineers that F's up most of the process. I have plenty of CD's and vinyl that sound fantastic and like crap on both ends of the spectrum fom both mediums. It is not the medium. It is horse shit engineers that record horse shit music that sounds like shit on your and my systems, PERIOD. Want better sounding CD's? Get better engineers.

W

[WEEZ]

eh-hem..yes, Wayner..it was mentioned.

[Russell Dawkins]

You guys forget that it's the bozo recording engineers that F's up most of the process. I have plenty of CD's and vinyl that sound fantastic and like crap on both ends of the spectrum fom both mediums. It is not the medium. It is horse shit engineers that record horse shit music that sounds like shit on your and my systems, PERIOD. Want better sounding CD's? Get better engineers.

W

c'mon Wayner, tell us what you really think!

I do think you are basically right, sad to say. A list assigning blame for an unsatisfactory listening experience, then,  in descending order would start like this in my books:

1. music and musicianship
2. engineering decisions
3. listening room acoustics
4. speakers
5. amplifiers

I think the rest - preamps, CDPs, TTs, cartridges, wires, power conditioning, support systems, and medium (vinyl, CD, DVD-A 16/44 vs 24/96) all are relatively less important than the above.

[martyo]

It would be hard for me to leave preamps off a list of blame that included amps. I would include the preamp before the amp. And with that this discussion could get off track. Good night.

[rabpaul]

Agree with martyo on adding preamps. Item 6?

TCG,
Has this not turned out differently that anticipated? Mediums don't matter, the music on the source does?

I gather from this and previous posts that vinyl will always be better for you. I am sure there are many like you too. I do have to ask, are your vinyl and CD setups of equal standing? Is you CD setup more expensive than your vinyl setup or the other way round?
I ask this because some years back I visited a friend who clearly favoured his vinyl setup spending something like 5 times more compared to his CD setup and it was very obvious which was better.

Vinyl/valves add euphonics and if that is something you love and can can't do without, CD/valves will be a compromise and CD/SS a distance choice. I think some of us have been weaned off the euphonics. I would blame this on technology, walkmans and Ipods too. We did have valve radios and tvs which were replaced by SS. Over the years some of us (I am assuming I am not alone) have become used to the SS sound finding the vinyl/valve sound a little too sweet even artificial. Before anyone pounces on this, let me give you an example.

I have heard Micheal Buble on tv and radio. I would think that if I heard him live (singing into a mike) he would not sound any different. When I hear him on CD, all I have is higher fidelity as compared to the tv and radio but in essence he sounds the same to me. Now I somehow think he is not going to sound like he does on a vinyl/valve or CD/valve setup. This same analogy would apply to bands too i.e rock, jazz where everything is SS amplified.

Its with classical music (unamplified) that I oddly enough find vinyl/valves somehow more acceptable. Only in recent years (it has to do with how much CDPs have improved) that I can actually listen and enjoy classical music via CDs/SS although deep down I think I would still prefer vinyl/valves. However having had silence for so many years I find vinyl (pops, scratches etc.) irritating and disturbing. So I won't be going vinyl anytime soon. Ok never.

[1000a]

However having had silence for so many years I find vinyl (pops, scratches etc.) irritating and disturbing. So I won't be going vinyl anytime soon. Ok never.

  I love that clarity of mind.  seriously for me it kinda comes down to economics most of music choices are in CD, giving new vinyl music a limited stage cause there are not many choices and when thy are there they are a little steep for me.  I also agree to the quiet of the back ground has spolied me to CD, but at the same time its really a little to much, now I miss my reel to reel hiss back then I was dolby dbx obsessed to kill hiss, now its gone and thats too much for me not reel enough   it never ends pros and cons everywhere. the symphony hall is quiet but a couple of Marshalls humming in the back ground are not .  but they hide the buzzing and we all are obsessed with Bybees and ever ending blacker back grounds, yes give me the detail lots of it, but sometimes when a track ends I hear my grey matter pulsing a little disturbing.  not cause it hurts its the deedly silence, hell i turn off my AC without question and even the fridge.

In a perfect world with the very best CD gear I be most happy if all the stuff recorded started at least from a tape base, big big fast fast tape have you but start it analogue, plenty still do this I prefer it over strait digi CDs most times, if they use TLC.

So with the world as it is I am placing far more effort into my CD section than vinyl because the simple fact thats where the new music is.  I only have so many $$ to alot so it makes since to me to devote it to the CD as oposed to the vinyl.  My vinyl is good basic but reasonable, MusicHall, Goldring and Gram Slee, and its good enough that when I want to hear any of many LPs I will never get on CD I can do so.  Yes the itch for vinyl still comes just for the experience alone, but so does my itch to hear my reel to reel which was broken and I in a I have to get rid of junk mode pitched it.

I will say that as good as I have gotten my system and I feel its very goodtubes w tons of detail and air, after listening to music loud for too long I do feel fatiqed.  Less so with good recordings more so with so so stuff, but even loud vinyl no matter how good will where me out too,not as quick but it will.   and a crappy PA has me running from speaker cabinets in search of ear plugs.

So my CD is still not where I envision I can get it, and I am on the cusp of trying a few new things to improve it.  CD is still to new we are still learning and even guys like me on this forum have not addressed in there systems every opportunity to improve CD, and many are fairly cheap.  much can be done, few have even tried the DIP jitter reducers and do not have Dodson, Levinson level gear.  I am just hearing about em and some people way more involved in audio than me have not yet heard them.    So there is still alot on the table for us CD guys give us time.

Really seriously how many really esoteric hand crafted efforts have gone into CD like has gone into vinyl.  you got 40 top notch tone arms tweeked by fanatics for 30 yrs. we got what 2 lasers, top and front loading CDs in square boxes.  you guys have a 30?+ yr head start (at 33 rpm) we are new kids on the block we will get there.  Our 33 rpm SACD and DVD-A crashed in a cornfield over Kansas cause the greedy freaks could not stop fighting over $$ now they both lost.   Watch Out Vinyl we are still at 78 speed and sound damn good while we are at it.   

 

[TheChairGuy]

TCG,
Has this not turned out differently that anticipated? Mediums don't matter, the music on the source does?

I gather from this and previous posts that vinyl will always be better for you. I am sure there are many like you too. I do have to ask, are your vinyl and CD setups of equal standing? Is you CD setup more expensive than your vinyl setup or the other way round?

Hey rabpaul,

I'd have to agree mostly with the first statement...if you don't like the music from the source in the first place, it doesn't matter what medium it's on.  But, I think recording engineers had equal propensity for F'ing things us (with nod to you, Wayner  )....the vinyl medium somehow gets more of the stuff that matters to me right.  It wasn't until I ran into Tim de Paravinci's quote that I realized the why's of what was missing, and what bothered me always, about CD playback.

I once (not long ago) had $4500 invested in my CD playback - now I have $39.00 and still enjoy music on that medium maybe 25% of the time.  I've had Vinyl setups all under $2000.00 over the years.....and enjoy perhaps 75% of the music on vinyl these days from $500 in playback gear (turntable, cartridge, isolation devices).  It seems not to matter the cost for me....Vinyl is just more enjoyable medium to listen to.

I have never needed tubes to enjoy vinyl....but never can enjoy CD without them.  Not positive why that is, but I have my thoughts on that subject.

I really like DVD-A a lot and think it's the near equal of Vinyl in many ways (with gobs more convenience, of course) - so I'm not at all a digital-hater...I have just found too many faults with CD to enjoy it.  I do have to say, I have not heard an outright irritating CD player made in over 5 years now - so the technology has progressed in some ways, but will always be a lightly-regarded slave to it's original design.  44.1 just ain't good enough......192K (SACD) seems to be relatively more adequate.

Clicks and Pops do stink......cleaning records with a vacuum and wet cleaner with an anti-bacterial agent has made all the difference in my enjoyment of the medium.  The nasties are relegated to a more much minor presence so I can concentrate on the finer details in the record performance.  It takes real effort to enjoy vinyl...which is why it will forever be relegated to an high-fidelity footnote and afterthought to most of masses (possibly to most of the self-professed audiophools, too) in the world. 

Besides, if I'm say, under the age of 35 (I'm 9 years older than that) and don't have interest in music of the 80's and prior and haven't cultivated a taste for Classical yet in my life.....I probably wouldn't own a turntable anyhow as there wouldn't be sufficient music for me to enjoy it.  If I was 35, it would make any investment in vinyl a dubious expenditure    I get a kick out of younger guys investing in vinyl....as I know it's not driven by any type of nostalgia for them, it's the quality of the medium that matters.  It has confirmed my thoughts about CD standards not good enough for years - now confirmed by Tim de Paravinci's Q & A as to why that is 

John / TCG

[Wayner]

I would like to add to John, TCG's comments on vinyl. Almost all vinyl heads, by the nature of the medium, treat LP's with the utmost respect. We know how to clean them, get the static out of them and don't scratch them. I would say with confidence that 99% of my collection has very little surface noise, even at moderately loud volumes. To listen to a noise free LP sends shivers up my spine and to think that Thomas Edison had the vison to invent something so right to the ears so long ago! It maybe took 100 years to come unto it's own, but I can't hardly stand to listen to CDs anymore. Not because they sound bad, but they are just too "electronic". Analog is mechanical like the 57 Chevy. Like a hand saw. Like Thunder.

Don't get me wrong that I don't like CDs either. I wont give mine up for a minute. I just have to be in a different mood for those.

[mcrespo71]

Give a listen to a couple of the best CD players and you might change your mind....

I've been auditioning the Naim CD555 and I can't believe how good it is.

Now if you could only buy one for about 4000 bucks!!  But the sound quality is
there!

Naim CD555   

[1000a]

  no doubt about it analog is quite beautiful ahs been for a good while just as film is smoother than digital, but in camera world digital is getting better quickly, it has moved much faster than digital audio when it comes to smoothness.

For those digital guys here is a DAC the reviewer said held its own with his buddy's very pricey TT rig, in a 27,000 front end, so who knows, http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue25/monarchy_m24.htm

He said in listening sessions usually the CDs don't get played much in this type of systems cause of the vinyls superiority.  not so w this DAC he says.  I ordered one for 1080. so I will do a review when ready.  The reviewer Lynn Olson has been around a long time and seems incrediblely knowledgable, been doing speakers since the 1970s and more recently advanced tube amps.  here is his site:  http://www.nutshellhifi.com/

[alphinmike]

I may be a little late on this thread! I have to say that I often think that I almost unique in thinking that CD is better than Vinyl soundwise. In my time I have owned three 'high end' turntables, the last being a Townshend Rock Reference which I sold on when my CD came of age. This was my best Turntable, much better than the fully specced Linn that it replaced.
I think there are several problems with CDP and if you look at the ultra expensive Naim machine you will see Naim have done extensive work on the power supply rails.All the key components have separate low noise supplies and I think that this is the key to its superior performance. The good news I feel is that you don't have to spend mega to achieve this level of performance. My machine is  NjoeTjoeb 4000 plus upsampler but to get good performance from it the power supply has been worked on. The key is noise reduction on the circuits with very high quality voltage regs (in my case from Paul Hynes) and separate low noise master clock power supply. Now this machine flys! Tent Labs have just launched a DIY CDP with all the power supply features of the Naim but a much more affordable price tag.Check it out on http://www.tentlabs.com If I was buying a CDP today I would look to the Chinese and have it modded. Those MHZS players on E BAY look a good candidate! I have to say that I too used to feel digital just wasn't nice but I feel the opposite today. I will say that the problem in my opinion is with the players themselves due to poor design and poor quality components fitted. Unfortunately when I look under the bonnet of most commercial machines I feel the end user gets a poor deal!

[1000a]

it does seem to me a lot of new ideas have come to the fore, many people are expending great energy the future looks bright if we do our homework.

[TheChairGuy]

I haven't heard a truly awful CD player or DAC in over 5 years now...so, clearly, there is progress. Exactly how much further this technology can improve is left to the future...if it didn't have adequate standards to begin with, it may go not much further than what we have today. 

Music on CD is just missing too many cues to the brain that recall music (for me...and if you recognize the stampede to old turntables, others, too ).  44.1 is simply insufficient to gather up all the music....192K (DVD-A) is a pretty massive step in the right direction, tho.  Assuming, the DVD-A's are from the original analog master or recorded new at 192K.  Anything re-recorded for DVD-A from the 'digital' 44.1K master will be no better than upsampling on today's CD players. 

For hoots, I just played both the CD and Vinyl version of Keith Jarrett's 1972 album, Expectations. 1972 meant it was an analog master...not even with Dolby SR involved, a very effective analog noise reduction system introduced about 1985 that gets you digital-like s/n ratio's from analog recordings (I think up to 25db additional noise reduction with it). The CD version is loud and pleasant to listen to...but it lacks all the cues on vinyl that speaks of live, real music.  The vinyl version, a few clicks and pops notwithstanding, portrays his fingers on the keys and the accompanying instruments with real verve and delicacy that whispers 'you are there'.

alphinmike, if convenience is your ultimate goal...stick with your excellent Njoe Tjoeb.  But, go get a mid-line turntable (and midline cartridge) with great speed stability, set it all up right on a well isolated base...and THEN compare.  It's not until you directly compare side-by-side, sometimes that you truly know what's missing. btw, if I owned my Townshend Rock with Helius arm and (modded) Grado cartridge that I had 20 years ago...I think it would slay any CD player brought up against it 

So, if anyone's prejudice about DVD-A was formed by listening to any music originally recorded over the last 25 years...you'll think DVD-A ain't that special. It has, in particular, the treble extension, range and delicacy of live/real music that CD lacks...in any playback variety...as the standards weren't good enough to begin with.

But the best news is....it ain't gonna' soon, folks.  I'm 44 - no matter how well I do at keeping cholesterol levels low, exercise, stay at proper weight, get regular chiropractic check-ups, and protect my ears on long flights (all ways to preserve as much hearing as yo ucan into the future) - I won't give a crap soon.  And, as my fellow obsessed vinyl-phools age too, we will all just be happy we can hear at all...and not give a rat's tail about the differences in technology. 

There's very few reasons to rejoice about aging...here's one, at least 

[miklorsmith]

So, your carefully tweaked vinyl system sounded better than your $39 cdp?  I find that hard to believe, John.   

A little like hunting with a Howitzer, hmmm?