Your system must have magnificent sound, delicious equipment choices.
Elk said Your system must have magnificent sound, delicious equipment choices.Totally agree with this statement. The Prodigies are incredible speakers -- some of ML's finest. And the rest of his equipment is top notch as well. In my opinion, it's hard to beat the sound of tube-fed electrostats.
many of you will know this company…I just mention it here because it was discussed how “analog sound” can be brought to hires digital recordings. It seems 2xHD is trying to do exactly this (in a strange way but they seem to be very experienced).
http://www.2xhd.com/index.html
I have many of their Jazz recordings, (which are really very good) and 2 of their classical recordings (which I consider a little bit dull sounding, but also nice otherwise)
They use the same speakers and Tascam mastering deck I do. Thus, they already have great credibility. 
It appears they are doing just what we were discussing; capturing analog sound on high quality digital - either from analog masters or running high resolution digital through analog pieces of kit and recording the result digitally.
Elk said They use the same speakers and Tascam mastering deck I do. Thus, they already have great credibility. :)It appears they are doing just what we were discussing; capturing analog sound on high quality digital - either from analog masters or running high resolution digital through analog pieces of kit and recording the result digitally.
yes, but the strange thing is, they don’t record vinyl playback to digital to catch the vinyl reproduction aspects as we mainly discussed, but DSD to analog tape+tubes and back to digital to catch some analog flair alone from that, which is only one part in an all analog playback.
Question is, why is this analog flair so important (even to professionals in this business) althought both analog and tubes (as vinyl) by definition add “inferior technologies” side effects. Why is this needed (question whom you ask for sure) to “improve” the “flawless” digital technology?
Digital technology answers this from the first CD days on with “we’re technically better and correct”. All the basic arguments didn’t change that much since then, technology improved, but many still aim for more analog sound, even since DSD.
There seems to be a discrepancy between digital’s technological superiority and what we (or some) need to be added to make the final reproduction more let’s call it “pleasant” when played back in an audio system (even if this is different from the recorded source). Reason why we (or some) need this, is maybe to compensate what a playback system with even a perfect source, but other shortcomiings within the whole system, will never reach compared to “live”.
I’d like to hear 2xhd’s original dsd files and the ones ran through the tube preamp. I may prefer the original. I have my own gear with tubes ( and honestly the DS and BHK is redefining several of my audio beliefs).
As far as using dsd like an analog tape deck (meaning going from d to a then back to d as a way of mixing or mastering, I don’t have a conceptual problem with that. I’ve heard sample rate conversion not sound that great. I would swear I have some older CD files I’ve listened to and thought these sound so fantastic (via the DS) that they must have been recorded or mastered to 44.1. Meaning better than newer cd files where they recorded 48k or higher and down sampled. My ears tell me one should digitize at the sample rate of the final product, meaning multiple masters at different sample rates.
Also since hooking up my turntable I have strictly been listening to analog the last few days. I’ve forgotten how much fun it is, even with having to put on a TTWEIGHT periphery ring and heavy center weight. I spent some time with tweeked HD800 headphones dialing in VTa (so I can hear as I makes changes)
My soundsmith strain gauge cart with hyper elliptical stylus (sgs6) requires such critical setup or else I get some subtle mistraking . Most owners use the 5 Stylus which doesn’t dig as deeply Into the grooves (better for used LP’s) but the detail with the 6 stylus is addicting and up there with the best digital. The nice thing is the stylus just pops out to change profiles.
Wish I could add a pic of my analog rig via my iPhone.
jazznut said yes, but the strange thing is, they don't record vinyl playback to digital to catch the vinyl reproduction aspects as we mainly discussed . . .Actually, much (most?) of what they offer is remastered analog recordings. They also discuss their turntable setup which they describe using when only an LP is available
There seems to be a discrepancy between digital's technological superiority and what we (or some) need to be added to make the final reproduction more let's call it "pleasant" when played back in an audio systemThere is no question some like the artifacts added by certain analog pieces of kit. Often these pieces add things such as soft-knee compression, etc. Here they are using analog equipment as out-board processing, adding it as an effect.
My Woo WA5 300B headphone amp would not be any fun if it did not add the sound of these classic tubes.
Aside of the sound discussion it’s time to talk about what I hate at vinyl when it appears:
- Mechanical distortion of all kind (inner groove distortion in classical music, too hot cut records etc.)
- Faulty pressings of all kind
- The need to replace or repair the expensive cartridge from time to time
What I hate at digital:
- Nothing of that kind
Nice implications with digital:
- The chance to listen to more of the whole digital library due to the avaibility of all albums by click on a mobile device
- Click and play, no setup time
- Quick an easy comparisons possible between different sample rates, flac/wav etc.
Less nice side effects with digital:
- Due to the missing physical factor, digital files as a product seem to have no “value”, they are more or less “consumed”
- when playing files, due to the immediate access, even more often one tends to jump between different music resulting in reduced involvement in the music
Nice implications with vinyl:
- The physical experience (LP Cover, process to play a record etc.)
- Like “slow food vs. fast food”: more tranquility in the process of music listening, deeper involvement in the music, continuous listening vs. skipping to the next track
Less nice implications with vinyl:
- The need to switch sides
- Effort of setup to play a record when there’s a wish to have fast access
A great summary
I particularly agree that playing an LP is a different aesthetic process. I like album jackets, physically holding the LP, etc. There is little appealing about a physical CD. Playing an LP is like reading a nicely produced book rather than on a Kindle.
As I always listen to a complete CD at a time (or complete LP), my involvement in listening is the same. I am unable to understand why random play or bleeding chunks ripped from multiple albums and assembled in a “playlist” is appealing.
yes, but even if we don’t speak about playlists but complete albums on CD or files: Even with CDs my experience was, if you can skip around, you tend to skip around, if you can’t, you just relax and listen 
I like both at its time
Interesting. I have zero interest in skipping around, regardless of format.
Elk said Interesting. I have zero interest in skipping around, regardless of format.Funny, I'm just the opposite. If the whole album or CD is great, I don't mind listening to it all the way through. But there are so many albums that have one or two excellent tracks and the rest of it is unappealing. I will often put a cd on, play one or two select tracks, then change the cd and play a track or two, then change the cd, and on and on. Playlists definitely make this style of listening much more enjoyable.
1 Like
I think your response is common. One major difference may be I typically listen to classical music. Listening to one movement or other portion of a work is far from satisfying.
But pop albums are often carefully constructed to be played as an entire experience in a certain order as well. You lose this continuity by skipping around. But I also never fall in love with one song and buy a CD just for this song. I buy because I like the artist.
As with so many things audio, no right or wrong here. If you are listening to music, you are right.
jazznut said Aside of the sound discussion it's time to talk about what I hate at vinyl when it appears:What bugged me about vinyl, besides the surface noise, was when dynamic passages would get clipped, either from dust buildup on the needle or the track wore out because I played it so much. I really don't miss it, but I never had the money to go full bore and get a proper setup.
- Mechanical distortion of all kind (inner groove distortion in classical music, too hot cut records etc.)
- Faulty pressings of all kind
- The need to replace or repair the expensive cartridge from time to time
–SSW
I listen to more and more vinyl. Love the sound I’m getting.
Just to add my own small experience…
Last weekend I had time to add my father’s old Lp player to my setup - not a top one to todays’s standard, but it’s what I had :
- SL 1510 Mk2 + shure V15 type IV + basic Project pre.
I put a classic Michael Jackson I also had on cd (ripped via Itune / Aiff and on my Nas) and did a one to one comparison…
I must admit I loved the Lp’s sound better than the digital version - and my kids too…and let the all album played.
I was left quizzical…
I’ll definetlly try other LP’s (mainly classical Piano) to follow up the experimentation…
Yes, some recordings prefer the one or the other playback. I think you just have to be careful not to compare different masterings. In your case, your LP rig, althought very nice, too, is probably by far not on the quality level of your DS DAC, but still has certain vinyl specific characteristics you like. Nice if you discovered something newly that you like.
Before my comparisons I read in the forum about Pauls first evaluations, comparing different masterings of a Patricia Barber LP between vinyl/digital and using a quite medium quality cartridge (Denon DL 103), which he soon recognized and upgraded to a comparable level afterwards with I guess new comparisons (but similar results in his perception). So I was warned.
That’s why I tried to be as sure as I can, not to compare different masterings and to put the DS DAC / Bridge to a level that’s optimized as far as possible.
For comparison I chose i.e. recordings from Analogue productions done by the same mastering engineer for LP and SACD/DSD or to a lower extent recordings like of the label ECM who as far as I know use the same mastering for both. And with Reference recordings I identified that in case of digitally sourced masterings, these indeed are different for LP and digital and not comparable.
As I have the chance to fit my active speakers to the tonal differences, in my case vinyl and digital at the end sound extremely comparable with both having slight strengths and weaknesses. Both is really fun. As a jazz fan, my main point with digital maybe at the end is, that it doesn’t reproduce especially i.e. cymbal sound fully on the level I personally like better from vinyl (more color, richness, extension, also dynamics without sounding any softer or harsher). Althought the DS DAC is extremely good in it, too. (My tweeter is not any harsh, but very resolving, an air motion transformer type)
Regarding vinyl technology I really had fun reading the vinyl bashing article of Andrew Benjamin in the 5th Copper issue.
Here’s just an excerpt, that really describes facts:
“Analog tape and the LP is not the answer to progress for the hi fidelity industry. It is not even the question. Vinyl technology is the same today as it was a hundred years ago. It is arguably primitive and needs brute force treatment to work well; an unreasonably expensive approach to ameliorate its fundamental shortcomings. Improvements for playback have been evolutionary, finite, albeit regular refinements requiring heroic treatment of vibration and expensive precision mechanics to overcome. These solutions were meant to address noise and vibration at the vinyl-stylus interface, and later downstream across the playback platform, speed instability and irregularity, and dimensional changes to materials.”
Aside of the fun a physical medium can give, and except of the many better masterings that exist on vinyl and vinyl only Reissues and originals that exist, I’d easily drop vinyl for good digital if it would also cover its strengths, but it doesn’t fully yet.
I have no clue why a technology full of mechanical shortcomings and compromises like vinyl is still ahead in some points, althought digital can reproduce every input (like needledrops) 1:1. Maybe it’s a question of mastering/production, that has to be streamlined even more towards what digital playback requires to inherit what’s still missing a bit.
On the other hand I can say that most of the kind of undescribable improvement towards what makes vinyl came from switching from USB playback (unoptimized) to Bridge II in my case and little less also from low to hires and changes from PCM to DSD. Possibly further optimizations in those fields as well as new firmwares close the gap (which also exists in the opposite way, only addressable with huge expenses in the vinyl area). Without the switch to Bridge II, sound wouldn’t have been on the level I really want. With USB you probably need the new LAN Rover to achieve this or connect a PSA Drive by I2s.
I really love both, my vinyl and my DS DAC.
P.S.: as folks at PSA have contact to folks as Gus Skinas:
On the back of a Blue Note SACD from a Hoffman/Grey mastering for LP and SACD I read “authored for SACD by Gus Skinas”. Any clue what this means? An add. stage of mastering?
The more I listen. . . the more I think that my LP playback is the richer listening experience. I don’t have many opportunities to compare direct identical mastering. . . and perhaps I might more accurately say that I prefer the mastering of the LPs of the 'fifties through 'seventies that I have to the digital masterings of the same material, but to be honest I think my turntable/phono preamp playback is actually of a higher caliber than my PWT/DS combo playback, though it did not cost quite as much. I love them both. . .but if I could go back three decades in time I would have stayed with LP collecting and upgraded my phono playback rather than start my obsessive cd collecting and search for the best digital sound (it was very unsatisfying for a few decades though I tried hard not to come to that conclusion).
Life is good because I have a huge library of analog and digital material to listen to and great playback in either format.
Well, althought the DS DAC is anything but exceptionally rich sounding, if you really don’t compare bad CD masterings with better vinyl masterings I guess it’s a matter of taste and focus and/or system matching.
You have a great player and a triode phono stage, which sure gives great playback I guess and in an area which is maybe not one of the major strengths of the DS. I wonder a little that you get a comparable speed/resolution/control/stage extension/layering/dynamics out of the Rega MM cartridge…or it’s not your main focus or you have a speaker placement which doesn’t enable such judgement etc. Just a thought.
I wonder how your judgement is with one of the newer especially rich and/or laid back sounding good digital recordings also available on LP (MFSL/Patricia Barber, Donald Fagen, Holly Cole etc.) and many that are only available in digital format like the very nice Sound liaison recordings etc.
There is 20-30% of stuff that really favours the DS DAC’s tonality more. And with the option to match your system you could even reach a status, where you generally wouldn’t want the DS richer. Just quite some other gear then would sound little too fat I guess.
jazznut said Yes, some recordings prefer the one or the other playback. I think you just have to be careful not to compare different masterings. [remainder of large quote deleted]Hi,
Tonight I tried another record - but I knew the Cd remastering was not top level… : Pink Floyd the Wall.
Amazing how my ears actually prefered the Vinyl.
As you said, my vintage turntable si "Vintage"but yet something happened that did not on my digital version. It makes me wonder if should not invest in a new decent e…
I don’t have any recent LP’s such as ECM records (Keith Jareth ? ) to have a better comparison. I’ll try Piano stuff (I have an Horowitz collection of great concerto’s form RCA…)
Regards