I didn’t mean “rich” in an audio speak way, I meant rich as in a wealth of enjoyment in the listening. Neither the phono playback or the DS is “rich” in the sense of thick and warm. (Though my ZP3 COULD be that way–I have an input, two driver, a rectifier and a voltage regulation tube to roll and the preamp can really transform through tube complements).
In my system LP playback gives better soundstage presence and more dynamics. The DS gives a bit better clear imaging which tends to unravel the “organic” nature of the performance in comparison. All the components are on PowerBases connected with AC-12 cords to the P5 and have similar interconnects (the DS has one generation newer a VooDoo Cable Stradivarius than the ZP3, and the turntable interconnects are captive Rega cables). My speakers are Decware HR-1, they have both an omnidirectional driver, a forward firing midrange driver and ribbon tweeter and a plinth-loaded driver in the speaker base. They really fill a room with sound and are pretty revealing of sources.
I just have come to prefer the sound of my vinyl playback, it seems closer to music being performed in my room (something that happens in my room in a non-playback way) and draws me in. It’s not faulting the excellent digital playback at all, another might prefer it.
As for comparing recent audiophile masterings I have compared Mobile Fidelity LP and hybrid SACD of Miles Davis’ “Sketches of Spain” and Bob Dylan’s “Blood on the Tracks.” I clearly prefer the LP to the Redbook via DS, and it’s not as easy to call in comparison to the SACD playback from my Denon DVD-A1UDCI universal player playback. . . I love the sound of both. In general I don’t buy audiophile vinyl as there are so many original pressings of albums I would like available quite reasonably; both these LPs were gifts, I had the SACDs already.
Regarding the other “rich”: I also have a very tight sounding vinyl rig (nothing like a Koetsu cartridge or a suspension drive or a overly warm sounding phono stage etc.) so it makes tonal differences to the DS DAC quite small.
My vinyl rig was much tighter and more controlled sounding than my previous digital gear.
Cool. I probably wouldn’t prefer that. . . it’s all about what we like, how we hear things. I got seriously into “audiophile” territory after I stopped playing music with others and looked for the sound and feel of live music around me in a playback system. Because so many jazz albums I always wanted to hear were suddenly being reissued by the truckload in the 'nineties on cd I moved to cd playback. . . but I think my tastes in playback are better served via LP. I’ve adjusted, I even did without LPs for over a decade, but I’ve steered a new course. . . .
Oh and one last comment about the Rega cartridge (Exact2 in my case): I keep reading people sneering at them or dissing them, I’ve really liked the two I’ve had on my RP3s (Elys2 and Exact2) with the Exact2 being the better. I’m sure there are much better, and probably more detailed ones, but I can’t afford them, and “more detailed” doesn’t always serve me best with my collection of predominantly “ordinary” and not audiophile recordings–“musical” is a better fit.
lonson said
As for comparing recent audiophile masterings I have compared Mobile Fidelity LP and hybrid SACD of Miles Davis' "Sketches of Spain" and Bob Dylan's "Blood on the Tracks." I clearly prefer the LP to the Redbook via DS, and it's not as easy to call in comparison to the SACD playback from my Denon DVD-A1UDCI universal player playback. . . I love the sound of both. In general I don't buy audiophile vinyl as there are so many original pressings of albums I would like available quite reasonably; both these LPs were gifts, I had the SACDs already.
I just have the Sketches MFSL LP unfortuately along with various other reissues of it, not the SACD.
In case you play to the DS DAC by quite unoptimized USB connection, try the Bridge II or the new LAN Rover. In my experience the LAn instead of USB way get’s you much closer to vinyl (from pure detail to “flow”)
I don’t play musical files or use computer audio; my PWT is connected to the DS via the HDMI connection using PS Audio’s best HDMI cable. I also have the Denon connected via coax for video sound playback, and the DVR via optical, both the best cables I found I could afford. (Mine is an audio and video system).
lonson said
Cool. I probably wouldn't prefer that. . . it's all about what we like, how we hear things. I got seriously into "audiophile" territory after I stopped playing music with others and looked for the sound and feel of live music around me in a playback system. Because so many jazz albums I always wanted to hear were suddenly being reissued by the truckload in the 'nineties on cd I moved to cd playback. . . but I think my tastes in playback are better served via LP. I've adjusted, I even did without LPs for over a decade, but I've steered a new course. . . .
Oh and one last comment about the Rega cartridge (Exact2 in my case): I keep reading people sneering at them or dissing them, I’ve really liked the two I’ve had on my RP3s (Elys2 and Exact2) with the Exact2 being the better. I’m sure there are much better, and probably more detailed ones, but I can’t afford them, and “more detailed” doesn’t always serve me best with my collection of predominantly “ordinary” and not audiophile recordings–“musical” is a better fit.
Yes, there we are different. I try to get the best out of the best recordings, even if it sounds inferior with worse recordings. And I also would have a different focus if I’d mainly play less than great recordings. Then I would spend much less on gear, too.
Yes, we’re different there. I am a bit split in that I do like to have the best sound, but musically my interests take me all over the map and scope of recorded history and some of the music I most like to listen to was recorded before the “high fidelity” age let alone in this time we live in now of fantastic sound quality. Audiophile recordings of Pee Wee Russell, Jack Teagarden, Fats Waller and many others just rarely exist and I’m in it for the music first.
lonson said
I don't play musical files or use computer audio; my PWT is connected to the DS via the HDMI connection using PS Audio's best HDMI cable. I also have the Denon connected via coax for video sound playback, and the DVR via optical, both the best cables I found I could afford. (Mine is an audio and video system).
ok, HDMI is the same as I2S as far as I know...then you're set.
lonson said
Yes, we're different there. I am a bit split in that I do like to have the best sound, but musically my interests take me all over the map and scope of recorded history and some of the music I most like to listen to was recorded before the "high fidelity" age let alone in this time we live in now of fantastic sound quality. Audiophile recordings of Pee Wee Russell, Jack Teagarden, Fats Waller and many others just rarely exist and I'm in it for the music first.
I had the same problem long time, as I also listen to many normal/vintage recordings or even audiophile ones that are strange in tonality.
My solution is that I can adjust my active speakers in tonality in many ways that don’t affect sound quality and phase. I fortunately can make nearly any recording sound nice to great without using ordinary tone controls.
Well, I can’t imagine that being possible to be honest with material recorded in the thirties and forties. But I’m happy with my system, very happy, and its limitations are livable.
that’s true and out of the range of sounding great, it’s rather possible to make those sound half wise pleasant.
I think there’s a lot of badly recorded music (i.e. most of 70’s to 90’s Rock/Pop stuff) that, in case someone prefers it, leads to a lot of frustration with modern high end gear. But that’s by good reason out of focus for such products. Those sound better on a car stereo or lowfi with bumpy bass, lowres and no details.
Okay. . . . I’ll take your word for it, I just haven’t known it to be possible as I am imagining its implementation.
By the way I use NON-ordinary tone controls on my amp supplied by the builder. They work fabulously at making many recordings “be all they can be.”
From the manual:
TREBLE & BASS CONTROL
The treble and bass controls for each channel are less than conventional.
The treble control is a simple shunt to ground meaning it's not in the signal path. It was designed to roll off the top end frequencies should they become too loud. There is no “flat” position of this control because it changes from one loudspeaker to another. It has to be set by ear. One way to do this is to simply turn it all the way down (counter clockwise) and then slowly raise it until you're satisfied with the amount of treble.
The Bass Control is not a frequency adjustment as the name would suggest. Instead what this control does is allow you to adjust how much interaction your loudspeaker has with the amplifier. This works by placing the voice coil of your loudspeaker in parallel with the cathode resistor of the input stage in this amplifier. As the impedance rises the gain of the amplifier is reduced in real time as the music plays. The control simply lets you vary how much this happens. The result varies widely from one speaker to another so again there is no such thing as a “flat” position on the control. In fact it can even work backwards with some speakers, so you simply have to listen and adjust.
great, I guess that helps you a lot with the 30s/40s recordings and you can deactivate when listening to better ones.
I think everyone who not only listenes to some good demo recordings but is a real music addict playing stuff with different quality or tonality and music plays a major part in his life needs more than one standard setup without options if there’s a chance.
Great or less great recordings…much of the certain “richness, different from tonality” as you say, that vinyl provides to digital is hard to describe and somehow like the difference between Horowitz and Lang Lang, both playing on highest level, but immediately audible so different.
I used to have multiple systems. . . that’s not possible now, just one main system to fight for keeping, so it has to serve as my one place for musical happiness. And for the most part it does.
With “need of more than one standard setup for non optimal listening to all kinds of music with different quality and tonality” I not necessarily meant the need for more than one complete system, but the need for either suppressable tone controls like you have or variable active speakers settings or DSP options in a DAC or impedance switching in a phono stage etc.
Otherwise today’s high end equipment generates more and more “mainly demo- and audiophile media listeners”. I often experience, that people with a wide music listening spectrum have less sophisticated setups, while high end freaks often mainly listen to a very limited spectrum of well recorded music of a certain kind.
That’s an interesting observation that I can see is supported by my own experience. Yes, I would probably go to a vintage tube receiver or some less articulate, and ironically less flexible, system if I did not have the audio tailoring and edge/glare removing system that I have; the best of these can offer me a comfortable listening experience. And the temptation is there to play only ‘the good stuff’. . . . Luckily I really am not a snobby or elitist listener and my need to hear all kinds of music always propels me into tackling items that are sonically challenging. On vinyl or digital discs.
jazznut said
. . . people with a wide music listening spectrum have less sophisticated setups, while high end freaks often mainly listen to a very limited spectrum of well recorded music of a certain kind.
Very common dichotomy: music v. equipment. It is typically very apparent which is most important to the listener.
I agree…I consider myself a “hi end geek,” staying with certain artists and recordings that I listen to over and over and studying the different nuances on my new system. Over the years I have been able to upgrade my equipment and my music collection to the best it has ever been.
While I like to hear well recorded tracks, I Sometimes I listen to bootleg recordings and streams from live jazz clubs (small’s) here in NYC. I have also purchased some of the PHIL Lesh simulcast.
One of my tests for gear used to be hoe well they handle brittle sounding recordings like some of todd rundrgens digital Cds which I love musically.
The DS draws the better aspects of those recordings out.
Also I find having subs with remote control over volume and slope really helps with sub standard sources by allowing me to dial in much more bass from thin sounding streams and recordings.