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.
The other day, a new member of this forum, contacted me and I invited him over to hear my system. He brought over his digital player to listen to his own classical CDs in my system, as I have only an analog front end. We first listened to some classical music and then some small scale jazz vocals on LP. He then played Nora Jones on CD followed by some of his larger scale classical CDs and a performance of Beethoven's "Appassionata". He thought his music sounded very good and really liked the way his digital player sounded in my system. I suggested that we finish the listening with my direct to disk 45 rpm LP recording of the "Appassionata". It was a different performance and recording. After about a minute, he looked at me and said, "Digital will never be able to do that."
I am not sure if "never" is the right word, but on that day, in my system, his CDs and my LPs sounded notably different.
One of the interesting points clearly made in the article is the distinction between which format is more accurate and which is more preferred by either the listener or the recording engineer. The concept of "better" is very much dependent on what one is talking about.
