Why CDs May Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl

[Al M.]

I"LL second that. DCS has moved away from their lab coat ethos , to one of musicality coupled with natural warmth while maintaining its previous virtue of transparency. Impressive ! Heard the TrinityDAC by any chance ?

I don't think dCS have changed their ethos. Their work always seems to have been based on algorithms and measurement first, while also paying attention to the audible result. It just seems that the improvements of their algorithms and of the practical implementation thereof have naturally lead the audible results towards where they are now.

We haven't heard the Trinity DAC.

 

[PeterA]

Are you certain?

Same mix, EQ, compression, limiting etc etc ... ?

And how can you be certain your turntable/rig isn't adding its own "mix"?



Peter, if so inclined, i can easily manipulate a visitor into thinking "this.format" "superior" ... simply by virtue of playing specific software.

I am not certain, but my guide here is Blizzard, and he wrote that it is one of the best direct analog v. digital comparisons that can be made. I am under the impression, though I was not at the recording session, that the mic feed went to two recorders, one tape, the other quad DSD. I don't know what happened after that. Can you suggest a better or more direct comparison between an LP and a digital file?

TBone, I was not so inclined, and my guest selected his own digital music. Remember, he brought his own source and his own music collection to insert into my system at my house. He even brought his own cables. After a couple of songs, I suggested we place one of my isolation platforms under his CDP, and he noted that the improvement was immediate. No manipulation was involved. We were meeting for the first time, he is a very nice guy, and we had a wonderful time getting to know each other and listening to his music.

This is a big part of what the hobby is about for me. Why so cynical, TBone?

 

[PeterA]

I"LL second that. DCS has moved away from their lab coat ethos , to one of musicality coupled with natural warmth while maintaining its previous virtue of transparency. Impressive ! Heard the TrinityDAC by any chance ?

No, unfortunately. I am not in the market for a digital source. I have just been accompanying Al M. and learning about digital along the way. It is an interesting topic.

 

[TBone]

I am not certain, but my guide here is Blizzard

(biting tongue)

Can you suggest a better or more direct comparison between an LP and a digital file?

Yes.

This is a big part of what the hobby is about for me. Why so cynical, TBone?

Conjecture has long been a big part of this hobby, hence my cynicism ...

 

[Jazzhead]

I don't think dCS have changed their ethos. Their work always seems to have been based on algorithms and measurement first, while also paying attention to the audible result. It just seems that the improvements of their algorithms and of the practical implementation thereof have naturally lead the audible results towards where they are now.

We haven't heard the Trinity DAC.

Lab Coat Ethos was a reference to their sound , which to me has previously been sterile and squeaky clean . Much like the atmosphere in a lab . I have the Trinity pre in house and if it's anything at all to go by , the DAC should be worth investigating.

 

[microstrip]

(...) After a couple of songs, I suggested we place one of my isolation platforms under his CDP, and he noted that the improvement was immediate. (...)

Can we know what was the CDP in this occasion?

 

[microstrip]

Lab Coat Ethos was a reference to their sound , which to me has previously been sterile and squeaky clean . Much like the atmosphere in a lab .(...)

Choosing the partners for a DCS system does not seem to be an easy job - you should not add something that hides its nuances and melodic lines, but should avoid going in "cleanness" or "sterility". At the same time the DCS has a fantastic energy and density - some systems seems to feel uncomfortable with it. For each time I listened to it sounding great, I listened for a few sounding miserable ...

 

[Al M.]

Choosing the partners for a DCS system does not seem to be an easy job - you should not add something that hides its nuances and melodic lines, but should avoid going in "cleanness" or "sterility". At the same time the DCS has a fantastic energy and density - some systems seems to feel uncomfortable with it. For each time I listened to it sounding great, I listened for a few sounding miserable ...

The first time I heard the dCS Vivaldi I was also unimpressed. But the second time in another system…that was something.

 

[PeterA]

(biting tongue)



Yes.



Conjecture has long been a big part of this hobby, hence my cynicism ...

Quoting me out of context and then changing the subject is not conducive to an educational discussion.

Meeting people and sharing listening time together is a big part of the hobby for me and one of the things I really enjoy. It has absolutely nothing to do with conjecture.

 

[PeterA]

Can we know what was the CDP in this occasion?

I do not think it is fair to discuss other people's equipment without their permission. I would rather discuss the article and the topic of this thread.

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

IMHO many times the problem is our DAC and system. I have listened to classical CDs that I considered poorly recorded or mastered sounding really good in other systems. Although my experience with it them is limited, I have great respect for the complete DCS top system playing classical recordings. It even managed to make the DG Orff Carmina Burana directed by Jochum sound fantastic.

I recently bought the Analogue Productions reissue of Living Stereo LSC2456 - Lalo Symphonie Espagnole on vinyl. I know what it sounds like as I've now listened to it a couple of times on that format. I got the chance to hear it this week in the SACD three channel format on a dCS Scarlatti setup (not my equipment obviously). There is very little to pick between the vinyl and the SACD layer in my opinion. But I'd grade them about 40% in terms of sound quality with 30% being a decent 78 and 100% being a live concert. That is to say that the sound is sufficiently wanting to my ears that it noticeably impairs the enjoyment of the music because the lack of sound quality is an ongoing distraction. As for the CD layer: gosh, it is as dry and grating as a close shave with a worn blade and no lubricant. The other release that accompanies it - LSC2767 (Rosza Violin Concerto) is better but still rates pretty low on the sonic scale in my opinion. But I can pick another recording out of this very same series - same remastering engineer, same equipment, same recording pressing plant - and I'd give it 90% for sonics.

I'm a huge dCS fanboy but as someone once said, Becker did not win Wimbledon with a Ping-Pong bat. The often agreed rule still applies - the quality of the source and the mastering still count for most of the quality of the product. The best turntable on the planet and the best dCS equipment can't make a bad recording sound great. But crucially, they can make such recordings sound tolerable.

Incidentally, the original 1S issue of that Lalo reportedly sounds very nice!

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

I"LL second that. DCS has moved away from their lab coat ethos , to one of musicality coupled with natural warmth while maintaining its previous virtue of transparency. Impressive ! Heard the TrinityDAC by any chance ?

Were they like that? I haven't had that much experience listening to their consumer equipment, but their very first pro analogue to digital converter was highly coveted for it's warm, musical presentation. It became the favoured equipment for classical remastering for that reason, amongst others.

 

[microstrip]

I do not think it is fair to discuss other people's equipment without their permission. I would rather discuss the article and the topic of this thread.

Ok, but as my perspective is mostly dominated by system sinergy and matching, I thought it would valuate the debate. But you are right, most people feel nervous when referring to equipment.

Besides I am currently playing with a pair of Mini IIs upstairs and I am finding them tricky in terms of digital player. They only appreciate the best ...

 

[astrotoy]

I did a direct digital versus analog comparison of the Janaki Trio Debut recording in both 45 rpm LP and DSD digital file about a month ago. Apparently, this is one recording of the same performance, produced in two different formats. It is a small scale classical chamber string performance: violin, viola, cello. The system was extraordinarily transparent and resolving.

I preferred the LP. The instruments has better tone, weight, body. There was more hall information and timbral information. I heard more spacial resolution and a better sense of presence. The file sounded flat, there was less information, and the instruments were slightly thinner sounding. The digital was very good, but the analog was better.

Yarlung has also released the Janaki Trio album on tape. I have it, but not the digital or vinyl. On the couple of albums from Yarlung where I have the tape and vinyl, the tape wins. I believe that Bob Attiyeh generated the digital from the analogue tape master.

BTW, I will tell Katie Kadarauch, the violist for the Janaki Trio that you are using her album for comparisons. She lived in our town when growing up and we used to carpool to the Oakland Youth Orchestra with my daughter. She has been the assistant principal violist for the San Francisco Symphony for the past nine years and also plays in my wife's concert series at UCSF.

Also, I agree that if CD's are produced, mastered and manufactured carefully they can sound superb. Winston Ma's FIM CD's are very special - with tremendous care taken at all steps of production. I was able to see and hear the back and forth between Winston and mastering engineers for the four CD's that are included in my Decca book. Most CD's don't get that kind of attention.

Larry

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

Also, I agree that if CD's are produced, mastered and manufactured carefully they can sound superb. Winston Ma's FIM CD's are very special - with tremendous care taken at all steps of production.

Yes, it is all about fanatical care, an obsessive attitude to get it as good as possible along with fantastic ears. If the remastering engineer cannot hear the differences between minute adjustments to the parameters along the way then if the end result sounds great it is only a fluke or the original source material was so wonderful that it could sustain significant damage without too much subjective sonic damage as a result.

When it comes to CD, there is no room to manoeuver in that final downsample and mixdown. It's like trying to reverse park a 4.5 metre long car into a 4.498 metre parking space. It can't actually be done at all and all you can do is inflict the least amount of damage that is hopefully sonically sympathetic or even subjectively assistive to the program material. When I mentioned that "2%" in my previous post, specific CDs I had in mind were those released by FIM that you mention and the CD layers of the Esoteric SACD classical label, along with certain others. I always keep saying it: Had the CD specs been 48 KHz and 18 bit in the first place, that still would have been enough to cater for the typical LPs lengths of the era preceding it and suddenly, going back to the parking analogy, you've got a 5.5 metre parking space. Still extremely tricky but possible again with fantastic ears and a fanatical attitude. Once you've gone the whole way to "proper" "hi-res", that is when you have ample parking space so that any dill using great equipment can park that car without hitting anything.

 

[Lee]

Given that an LP has the ability to store a 50khz signal, that equates to a 100khz sampling rate, roughly 2.5X the resolution of CD.

 

[Lee]

But really both formats can sound great. I do think from experience that LP is slightly ahead of better hirez digital.

 

[amirm]

Given that an LP has the ability to store a 50khz signal, that equates to a 100khz sampling rate, roughly 2.5X the resolution of CD.

That's called bandwidth, not resolution .

 

[fas42]

Interestingly, as tested on the dCS Rossini DAC, also 'crappy' CDs can sound great. For some reason the quality of A/D conversion and CD manufacturing seem to matter less there; don't ask me for a technical explanation.

I've never had a problem with CDs as a format of course. The "crappy" CD sounding good behaviour is one I've mentioned often, and it took me some time to understand what was happening here: simply put, the well behaved CD playback is extracting maximum content from the "poor" CD, and not corrupting it any significantly further - then the ear/brain steps in and filters out what it's after, the musical event, and the "badness" fades away, subjectively.

I've just become more aware of some research studies investigating this ability of the brain - it's called Auditory Scene Analysis, fascinating stuff.

 

[Al M.]

That's called bandwidth, not resolution .

Precisely