This is embarrassing to admit but I hooked up my turntable today for the first time in Close to 2 years. I have been so seduced by the sound of the DS that I thought vinyl couldn’t possible hold a candle to it.
Well it seems the BHK 300’s are so good I’m hearing the strengths of vinyl anew!
Not that I’ve done any comparison yet, but there is a nice ease to all analog vinyl that I appreciate after not hearing it for so long.
MY guess is that the DS might still be more accurate to the master, but that also has to do with the mastering /generation used pehaps more than the format.
Also my vinyl rig costs more than 6 times the DS. For you analog junkies, it’s a 150 lb aluminum TTweights momentus with a phantom II arm and sound smith strain guage cart all sitting on a halcyonics type active vibration platform meant for electron microscopes.
It’s nice, that such a discussion here is possible (and even leads to some vinyl rediscovery) without annoying dogmatisms or aggressive discussions.
I’m aware, that starting a vinyl/digital experience thread on a site of a manufacturer of purely digital sources (and connected forum editors & followers) could lead to more than lively discussions.
Fortunately Ted and Paul are very open minded, tolerant and also experienced with vinyl. This shines through between their lines and I like that.
Posting here is like making such a post on a soleley turntables manufacturers forum, where you mostly meet people, who for money reasons, ignorance, theoretical observations or whatever other reason decided to only invest in vinyl reproduction and never owned or even heard a digital quality like the DS DAC to fairly compare with their analog rig. I think you really need to live and listen (emotionally, analytically) with both rigs and really comparable rigs digital/analog for a long time to know what you talk about.
My experience in such discussions is, that listeners who intensly have this experience - or better – own both rigs on a fairly comparable level, are very open minded in both directions, not only in terms of tolerance, but also in terms of balanced instead of one-sided argumentation and conclusion.
So it’s very interesting to read from people like „emailists“, as I assume, there are very few, (even, or maybe especially in the high end audio world), who really own and use both on an appropriate level and therefore have an oviously undogmatic background.
I’m aware, that starting a vinyl/digital experience thread on a site of a manufacturer of purely digital sources (and connected forum editors & followers) could lead to more than lively discussions.
I just wanted to note that PS Audio has long and still does manufacture phono preamplifiers.
To be honest, I don’t think it takes 6000 dollars plus (or really 12,000 dollars plus if you use a PWT as I do with the DS) to have an analog system that gives as much satisfaction as the PS Audio digital combo can deliver. Indeed it was only until I was able to step up to the plate with the DS and PWT and really good power treatment, isolation components and cabling that I had the same level of sonic excellence that I got from a less expensive vinyl playback set up. I am glad to have the wonderful playback in both “worlds” that I have now.
jazznut said
ELK, with your last two posts about remasters quality and vinyl plugin suggestion for replicating what I mean with vinyl strengths, you kind of destroyed all the constructive trust in your serious vinyl experience I brought into the discussion ;-)
It occurs to me that perhaps you are thinking that plug-ins are less serious/lower quality methods for manipulating sound. The opposite is true. The highest quality software, such as iZotope's Ozone mastering software, is often employed as a plug-in to digital audio workstation software. These same plug-ins can be used in playback software audiophile's use. This software could be used to add vinyl-like mastering to digital sources.
There are also plug-ins which replicate the sound of old-school vinyl to simulate the dust, scratches, and warp of a worn record and the electrical and mechanical noise of a turntable. iZotope offers such a plug-in for free, click. It works incredibly well and is great fun, but this a high quality effect, a parlor trick, not what you would be interested in.
Elk, does the plug-in exist that could change the mastering from digital to vinyl (sans noise from dust, scratches and warp)? That would be the true test of if the real difference is the mastering or the media itself.
There are some mastering plug-ins for vinyl, but I have not played with them.
But nothing is going to take a master for CD playback and turn it into a master for vinyl playback. For example, you cannot undo compression. Similarly, mixing for vinyl is often different such as placing low frequency instruments such as kick drum and bass in the center, etc. One cannot undo the mix. Finally, we will not have the changes the cutting engineer makes as he is cutting the master.
We would need a raw mix which is then 1) mixed and mastered for vinyl, and 2) separately mixed and mastered for CD. Compare on a good DAC. One will hear a lot of what vinyl does in this comparison. (Note: the vast majority of LPs are recorded and mastered digitally.) But it will still lack the changes the cutting engineer makes, the idiosyncrasies of cartridges, etc.
The other test, which I would find more interesting, is to take a good two-channel recording of analog instruments with limited dynamic range such as a string quartet, and burn it to CD and stamp some LPs. No mixing as it is two channel, no EQ, no compression, etc. Then compare the LP and CD. I expect them to sound different, but I would love to experience how they are different. Does it come down to the sound of the DAC v. cartridge/'table/arm? Literally vinyl v. a digital file?
Vinyl and digital fundamentally differ, of course. Vinyl can never replicate the inky black silence of digital or digital’s dynamic range for example.
I find compelling that digital can superbly capture LP playback. This indicates to me that good digital does not have a sound of its own, but faithfully captures and reproduces the source.
Perfect Sound Forever v. Imperfect Sound for a Limited Time. Both have their charms.
Perfect Sound Forever v. Imperfect Sound for a Limited Time.
the impression you’ve got a fixed agenda here, also in trying to get things finally valued, even if it’s only your opinion, as well as my impression your practical experience is one-sided, prevents me from starting to discuss things to death.
Elk said
Perfect Sound Forever v. Imperfect Sound for a Limited Time.
the impression you’ve got a fixed agenda here, also in trying to get things finally valued, even if it’s only your opinion, as well as my impression your practical experience is one-sided, prevents me from starting to discuss things to death.
Sorry, that I’d like to drop out in this case.
Hmmm? Not my impression. I thought it was going well. Considering all the detailed experience shared by jazznut and the great info on vinyl mastering and cutting from Elk.
I found it all very illuminating. And I have been spinning vinyl for 66 years!! Since I was 3.
Headphones just didn’t work for me, no matter how hard I tried.
I was finally able to build my audio room before selling all of my big rig.
I had sold my Manley NeoClassic 250 mono blocks. Those have been replaced with a pair of Cary CAD280 SA V12’s run in parallel mono with a mod or two. So I am a REALLY happy camper.
Headphones just didn’t work for me, no matter how hard I tried.
I was finally able to build my audio room before selling all of my big rig.
I had sold my Manley NeoClassic 250 mono blocks. Those have been replaced with a pair of Cary CAD280 SA V12’s run in parallel mono with a mod or two. So I am a REALLY happy camper.
that sounds good!
quite sometime ago I also made a big downgrade, not in sound, but in space and heat. Downgraded from passive speakers and two Lamm M 1.1 hybrid mono blocks to active speakers.
Not in the least. I find sound as a physical thing fascinating. And do not hesitate to interject humor. It's a hobby after all. (Also, if you look around the forum you will find that "Perfect Sound Forever" has taken some serious shots.)
. . . as well as my impression your practical experience is one-sided . . .
Your assumptions are getting you in trouble; you are reaching fundamentally flawed conclusions.
I suspect what is troubling you is that I do not automatically find vinyl magical merely because it is vinyl. Bald assertions “It’s better!” “I hear it!” do not impress me.
I am intrigued however that vinyl does sound different and have tried to understand why for quite some time. There is no question a good share of the difference (most? all?) are the physical limitations of the media and how engineers have learned to work within these. This is similar to how analog tape exhibits soft-knee compression when it approaches saturation.
Another aspect is that many of us are very comfortable with and feel warmed by the sound of vinyl. We simply like the sound, like a cozy blanket. It certainly does not sound real; no one with ears is going to confuse the best vinyl playback with the real thing. But this does not prevent us from enjoying it, nor should it.
While digital can capture the sound of vinyl, the converse is far from true; the vinyl reproduction will not sound like the original. So what is going on with vinyl and why is it so compelling to many? It is not because it is an accurate simile of the original.
[By the way, your Mona Lisa/plug-ins analogy fails as the painting itself is the original. By contrast, a recording is a facsimile of an actual/original musical performance. You apply plug-ins to the facsimile, not to the original, nor try to create an original with plug-ins.
Applying processing to a recording to make it sound better is however akin to taking a photograph of the Mona Lisa and using Photoshop and its plug-ins to make the photo better. We do this all the time. It works. Wonderfully well. Plug-ins for recordings and for processing photos both perform magnificently. And exactly how Photoshop can be dreadfully misused, audio processing can also be applied to create havoc - think heavy handed dynamic compression and AutoTune as examples.]
And thanks for the support on my amp choices. I just kind of fell across them. Used from 175 Hz up connected to stat panels with passive crossover bypassed.
