Everyone who read my little blog about the RMAF show knows what I said. And what I said was that in every single room I went into that had both digital and analog to play back, the analog always sounded better-and better by a large margin.
I have to confess that at my house, in my room, with my system, the difference between the sound of analog and digital is smaller in comparison to what I heard at the show. Since I jettisoned my Counterpoint SA-5.1 preamp for the simply dynamite Yamaha C2a preamp (which is soon to be replaced by the Krell KBL), there has been a convergence of sound between digital and analog. Not 100% mind you, but closer than what I would have believed prior to the Y2a. Why this is so is a matter of speculation of course.
When I was using the Counterpoint 5.1, the difference between the sound of my music server and my turntable or R2R was very much like what I heard at the RMAF. The D/A converter I’m using is the Creative Labs E-MU 0404. Larry Toy gave this thing rave reviews and Steve backed up what Larry said because Steve heard the DAC in his house. I took the small plunge and bought it to go with the server I built. I never liked the damn thing when I was using it with the 5.1 preamp. It sounded like digital always sounded to me-cold, uninvolving, and amusical. I even sent Steve an email and asked him if he really listened to the 0404 because I couldn’t believe he had anything good to say about it based on what I was hearing. Steve assured me he had listened to it and it really was good.
Fast forward to the 5.1 being sent to Mike Elliott for the last round of upgrades and my purchase of the C2a to tide me over during the long wait. I lashed up the system with the C2a and hit play on Foo Bar to let things start cooking. I quickly realized that the sound I was now hearing from my digits was not the same sound I had been hearing. I don’t want to make the digit lovers cringe, but it sounded more like analog. The Y2a was simply resolving more information from the server than the 5.1 was able to. An example would be a cut from Jennifer Warnes album “The Well.” Cut 7, “The Panther” sounded like an entirely new song. And this is just the redbook version of this album. There was so much high frequency information flying around the room through the Y2a I was just astonished. After the 5.1 returned to me and I played this cut again, I knew I was in trouble. And by in trouble, I mean I was financially wedded to the 5.1 with having over $5K invested in all of the upgrades including what I paid for it. I knew there was no way I would come close to selling it for what I had in it. I had to settle for $2700 which was a beat down.
I only had the KBL in my system briefly before it went down for the count, but what I heard in that short period of time was enough to excite me. As good as I think the Y2a is (and trust me, this preamp kicks major butt and is just stupid good for the money. The phono section alone sounded better than my ARC PH-3SE which sold for $2595), the KBL is better still. There is another level of refinement, elegance, and elevated sound quality with the KBL. The digital divide didn’t expand or contract with the KBL in my system if memory serves me correctly.
Back to my main point: Why is there more convergence of the sound between digital and analog at my house than what I heard at the show? Surely I don’t have more resolving power with my digits than the high-priced spread I heard in room after room. Were the preamps at the show so “good” they weren’t good (like my 5.1)? I doubt that too as I heard some really top-notch gear. The easy way out would be to say that the gear at the show is simply more resolving than my system (amp, preamp, speakers, etc.) and hell, maybe that’s right. But maybe not. I can promise you that when I returned home from the show and listened to my system, I didn’t need a box of tissues to dry my tears because I was so sad because of the difference in sound quality from the show to my house. I was very happy actually if not conflicted.
I have to confess that at my house, in my room, with my system, the difference between the sound of analog and digital is smaller in comparison to what I heard at the show. Since I jettisoned my Counterpoint SA-5.1 preamp for the simply dynamite Yamaha C2a preamp (which is soon to be replaced by the Krell KBL), there has been a convergence of sound between digital and analog. Not 100% mind you, but closer than what I would have believed prior to the Y2a. Why this is so is a matter of speculation of course.
When I was using the Counterpoint 5.1, the difference between the sound of my music server and my turntable or R2R was very much like what I heard at the RMAF. The D/A converter I’m using is the Creative Labs E-MU 0404. Larry Toy gave this thing rave reviews and Steve backed up what Larry said because Steve heard the DAC in his house. I took the small plunge and bought it to go with the server I built. I never liked the damn thing when I was using it with the 5.1 preamp. It sounded like digital always sounded to me-cold, uninvolving, and amusical. I even sent Steve an email and asked him if he really listened to the 0404 because I couldn’t believe he had anything good to say about it based on what I was hearing. Steve assured me he had listened to it and it really was good.
Fast forward to the 5.1 being sent to Mike Elliott for the last round of upgrades and my purchase of the C2a to tide me over during the long wait. I lashed up the system with the C2a and hit play on Foo Bar to let things start cooking. I quickly realized that the sound I was now hearing from my digits was not the same sound I had been hearing. I don’t want to make the digit lovers cringe, but it sounded more like analog. The Y2a was simply resolving more information from the server than the 5.1 was able to. An example would be a cut from Jennifer Warnes album “The Well.” Cut 7, “The Panther” sounded like an entirely new song. And this is just the redbook version of this album. There was so much high frequency information flying around the room through the Y2a I was just astonished. After the 5.1 returned to me and I played this cut again, I knew I was in trouble. And by in trouble, I mean I was financially wedded to the 5.1 with having over $5K invested in all of the upgrades including what I paid for it. I knew there was no way I would come close to selling it for what I had in it. I had to settle for $2700 which was a beat down.
I only had the KBL in my system briefly before it went down for the count, but what I heard in that short period of time was enough to excite me. As good as I think the Y2a is (and trust me, this preamp kicks major butt and is just stupid good for the money. The phono section alone sounded better than my ARC PH-3SE which sold for $2595), the KBL is better still. There is another level of refinement, elegance, and elevated sound quality with the KBL. The digital divide didn’t expand or contract with the KBL in my system if memory serves me correctly.
Back to my main point: Why is there more convergence of the sound between digital and analog at my house than what I heard at the show? Surely I don’t have more resolving power with my digits than the high-priced spread I heard in room after room. Were the preamps at the show so “good” they weren’t good (like my 5.1)? I doubt that too as I heard some really top-notch gear. The easy way out would be to say that the gear at the show is simply more resolving than my system (amp, preamp, speakers, etc.) and hell, maybe that’s right. But maybe not. I can promise you that when I returned home from the show and listened to my system, I didn’t need a box of tissues to dry my tears because I was so sad because of the difference in sound quality from the show to my house. I was very happy actually if not conflicted.
I came into the hobby in earnest as LP was dying and CD was on the store shelves en masse. My first CD player was a godsend. Heresy! Let's take a look at the context though. I didn't have a good turntable, used crappy MM carts and worst of all didn't even own an alignment protractor. Now it makes sense that my cheap-O CD player sounded so good to me. So my bias was reversed. I was a digital zealot until I heard a well set up turntable playing well cared for vinyl. What ticks and pops and other assorted surface noise? Ironically, with the CD itself in decline, we get these players and dacs that deal with the problems my cheap-O player obviously had. We're now at a point where both technologies are mature so I figure that's the reason the gap has closed or as Mark puts it, there's a convergence.
