0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 42130 times.
Quote from: Browntrout on 21 Apr 2009, 05:46 pmHas anyone heard a digital setup that sounded as realistic as the best analogue rig?Nope - and I think no Redbook/CD can ever be as natural as it has inadequate resolution at 16 bits and 44,100 samples per second. Another, future digital technology maybe ....but, none that I am aware of today. ...and to Konut earlier: zealous cleansing of a record is mandatory to fully hear the virtues and betterment over CD. If you hear a lot of noise between passages, you ain't heard a properly set-up vinyl format. Frankly, I cannot listen intently to either classical...probably the most demanding/taxing music genres (in terms of naturalness as so much of it is un-amplified and ferrets out fake sounds easily) out there...on CD. Vinyl simply is reminiscent of the real event...CD can never approximate it. Which brings another point to bear...the genre you listen to will have bearing on the format you like. For pop, CD seems more than sufficient. But for classical and piano works, only vinyl will do. Jazz is in between the extremes...vinyl or CD is sometimes a toss-up John
Has anyone heard a digital setup that sounded as realistic as the best analogue rig?
"Despite the test conclusion being that 24-bit/96kHz resolution itself offers no audible benefit, the authors wrote that "virtually all of the SACD and DVD-A recordings sounded better than most CDs - sometimes much better." Their reasoning behind this was that the improved sonics were coming not from increased resolution but from better mixing and production by the audiophile labels producing SACDs and DVD-As. "Engineers and producers are being given the freedom to produce recordings that sound as good as they can make them, without having to compress or equalize the signal to suit lesser systems and casual listening conditions. These recordings seem to have been made with great care and manifest affection by engineers trying to please themselves and their peers."http://www.audiojunkies.com/blog/1254/does-highres-audio-really-sound-better
....it probably has a long way to go before it's fully developed.
Quote from: rajacat on 23 Apr 2009, 12:55 am....it probably has a long way to go before it's fully developed. The vinyl technology has 100+ years behind it.The digital tech has, in comparison, roughly 30 years.I'm excited for the future.Bob
Did you listen to the CDs on a CD player or were they losslessly ripped to a hard drive and played back through a modded SB, Modwright Transporter or perhaps one of Empirical Audio's devices? The reason I ask is because these devices are reputed to be more SOTA than most CD players thereby more suited to test the potential of digital playback. The state of the art in digital playback is not static, in fact it probably has a long way to go before it's fully developed. -Roy
''' my opinion regarding the sota of digital playback is that it's fully max'd out, at least as far as 16 bit/44.1khz goes.'''This is my understanding too.
It's only your opinion. Obviously many disagree with you. I have a vinyl setup but I try to keep an open mind. I guess I haven't drunk the Kool-Aide yet.
Quote from: Browntrout on 23 Apr 2009, 08:50 am''' my opinion regarding the sota of digital playback is that it's fully max'd out, at least as far as 16 bit/44.1khz goes.'''This is my understanding too.It's only your opinion. Obviously many disagree with you. I have a vinyl setup but I try to keep an open mind. I guess I haven't drunk the Kool-Aide yet.
but ten years have passed now, and i haven't heard any improvements...so, tell me again, how i am not keeping an open mind? doug s.
Quote from: rajacat on 23 Apr 2009, 09:06 amQuote from: Browntrout on 23 Apr 2009, 08:50 am''' my opinion regarding the sota of digital playback is that it's fully max'd out, at least as far as 16 bit/44.1khz goes.'''This is my understanding too.It's only your opinion. Obviously many disagree with you. I have a vinyl setup but I try to keep an open mind. I guess I haven't drunk the Kool-Aide yet. when my ~10 year old modded $150 dac can go toe-to-toe w/the latest and greatest digital gear - $8k of it - on an extremely hi-rez system, and when everyone in the room hears no meaningful differences - well, i feel comfortable w/my statement. you haven't drunk the kool-aide yet?!? it's you, imo, that needs to stop drinking the kool-aide being pushed by the digital equipment mfr's! as i said before, i'd love to be proven wrong - i'd love for there to be a meaningful improvement awailable for 16/44.1 sound. if it got as good as winyl, well, i'd be happy as a pig-n-poop! i ain't holding my breath, tho. now, i admit it could happen - it was not until the late 90's that i thought redbook was anything more than a tolerable playback medium, and i believed that would never change. to my delight it has changed, and i actually enjoy it now. but ten years have passed now, and i haven't heard any improvements...so, tell me again, how i am not keeping an open mind? doug s.
as i said before, i'd love to be proven wrong - i'd love for there to be a meaningful improvement awailable for 16/44.1 sound. if it got as good as winyl, well, i'd be happy as a pig-n-poop! i ain't holding my breath, tho. now, i admit it could happen - it was not until the late 90's that i thought redbook was anything more than a tolerable playback medium, and i believed that would never change. to my delight it has changed, and i actually enjoy it now. but ten years have passed now, and i haven't heard any improvements...so, tell me again, how i am not keeping an open mind? doug s.
Frankly, I've heard rather enormous strides forward for CD the past 5 years. Both in an absolute way of improvement and a bettering of price points for passably good performance. It's FAR better than I ever thought it could get, and at superbly low price points, the past ~ 5 years.As much as it has risen in standards - it still falls short of vinyl, ultimately (whether computer hard drive, or spinning disc uni-player, universal player of standalone DAC....with all the green pen marks, disc dampers and ebony thingamabob's under the player ) It's still 2nd rate next to vinyl.....but, it's NOT an un-enjoyable format now to listen to (the past 5 years - in my opinion, of course)If you listen mostly to Pop and Rock...it might be all you need. But when you hear un-amplified instruments (strings, woodwinds, tympani, piano, brass, triangles and the like) in classical and some other forms of music....the naturalness of how this all sounds makes all the digital technologies rather a painful experience for me. I listen to it all - but, when I listen to classical CD's (which, you'd think, among the more careful of mastered CD's, no? ) it completely stinks to listen to. I'm nearly done listening to classical on CD...it sounds utterly false. DVD-A is a nice step forward in that regards...but vinyl simply rules Seriously, those of you that keep throwing good money in playback for what is a inherent shortage of resolution with CD...make your next ~$1500 investment in vinyl and you will be undoubtedly happier for having done so. John
Can you name the 8k of digital gear you were using for comparison? Was it just a CD player or the latest computer based digital gear? BTW, I've always preferred lemon-aide to kool-aide. -Roy
one thing to ad - in my system, i have separate isolation transformers which i use, one each for my dac and transport; this makes it sound better in my system - higher resolution & lower noise-floor. i didn't have the isolation transformers in my a-b comparisons...doug s.
