So, I only listen to digital recordings on my DAC and analog recordings on my turntable. I’m sure the logic is goofy so, need a little help to understand why.
If something was recorded in analog, EVERYTHING is in the tape. IF it was mastered well and pressed well, assuming the analog playback chain is on par with my DAC playback (not sure how you measure that except by ear) it will be as good as it can be in the analog system right? Just because you move to DAC, it can’t possibly pull anything out of the Tape master that wasn’t pulled out in the vinyl right??
Needless to say, if there was a digital recording, I might as well listen to it on my DAC, why in the hell would I listen to a Vinyl version of this.
If you say so. The Vinyl versus Digital argument is so old and tired. In my house Vinyl wins easily. That is not to say Digital is suffering, far from it. But if you are looking for the definitive answer, the last word on which is better, you won’t find it here.
In my mind, it comes down to what you are seeking to achieve when listening to a mediocre analog master. One approach is seeking the most accurate representation of the mediocrity. Nothing wrong with that but it should be recognized that the state of an analog master is not static. Magnetic tapes degrade with time. So are we seeking the original mediocrity or a faithful representation of today’s mediocrity?
Digital masters, from a “bits” perspective, have the potential to be accurately preserved over time. Notwithstanding things like quantization error, a high resolution digitization of an analog master can preserve its current state in a similar manner.
If one wishes, the digital master can receive processing that attempts to “clean up” and effectively turn the clock back on the degradation issues present in the current analog master. Some will appreciate the more pleasing results. Others will cry sacrilege. No right or wrong but they are available options.
A few years ago, Mofi got in trouble for advertising their One-Step releases as “purely analog.” This was misleading and unfortunate. However, few will argue that the quality of the reproduced One-Step music is inferior to the original analog releases.
A little off topic but one last point about digital masters is that they provide for much more effective archiving and back-ups. In 2008 a fire destroyed a large number of analog master tapes at Universal Studios Hollywood which significantly damaged the Universal Music Group’s vault, destroying many original master recordings from a wide range of artists such as Nirvana and Elton John. Digital archiving would have preserved these irreplaceable artifacts.
Thanx for your thoughtful reply. So, if I read between the lines, there’s nothing to gain, by listening to a recording from 1959 on a digital system today.
In fact, vinyl from 1959 will likely sound BETTER (in theory) because it was mastered from fresh tape compared to something that was digitally mastered TODAY due to tape degradation.
Quite possibly. It depends on how bad the original master has degraded over the past 65 years (there are storage techniques that help mitigate the rate of degradation). It also depends on how effective digitization of the master was in turning back the clock and if there was any attempt to “better” the original master using digital techniques to enhance dynamics, reduce noise, etc. Some will call that cheating but many will accept it if it results in a more pleasant listening experience. I go back to the One-Step example where the digitized version of today’s analog master tape produces LPs that sound better than its first pressing in most cases.
