WBF Poll: Which Sounds Better, Digital or Analog?

[garylkoh]

What about 74 vs 80 min versions? The 74's always work, too many 80's become coasters(*). I've yet to find a 80 CD-RW which works with my current Sony.

I generally avoid 80min CD-Rs as they seemed to be lower quality and deteriorate faster than the 74mins.

In jewel cases, the disc is suspended by the center hole and isolates the written area [read side] from contacting any surface

All correct except for the above. The written area is under the label side. A scratch on the read-side can sometimes be read-through with the laser. However, a scratch on the label side destroys data.

 

[TBone]

As I recall they were cap-coupled at the input, and changing that plus a related resistor or two was a considerable help. Probably much more if you have spent 2 years getting it to suit your needs I am guessing.

A lot more ... these are not identical sister amps, they're slightly different versions. Each had several different issues. They also looked to have been tossed around, from DIY 'phile to DIY 'phile. Bringing them back to stock condition, on spec, was the first task.

Frankly, of all the amps I've fiddled with, these really intimidated me. Lots of big caps on charge; the entire act of dissemble/assemble is a major PITA, @ ~72 pounds each, with access (mostly) thru the bottom and sharp heat sinks on top ... simply placing 'em on & off the workbench represents potential pain. Although I did much work & maintenance, they were farmed out to a more knowledgeable technician for the major items.

I luv 'em with a passion, but to be perfectly honest, I welcome their absence from time to time. For 1, it opens up opportunities to listen to other amps & pre-amps. They also eat tons of energy; the city lights dim the instant I switch 'em on. They can run quite hot; the louder they play, the cooler they stay; so summer time listening can be limited (unless I want to fight the heat with AC) and how these amps maintain a certain level of heat dispersion dictates the way they sound.

These are legacy products built by a very knowledgeable/passionate man, designed to represent the very best in a different era. The reality is that Classe could never have sustained a good business model selling only these type products. D.Reich was eventually sent packing, Glen Grue would replaced him, and everything changed, including sound quality ...

 

[Bruce B]

Analog tastes better:

Tape tastes better than vinyl.!!!!

 

[TBone]

 

[NorthStar]

I generally avoid 80min CD-Rs as they seemed to be lower quality and deteriorate faster than the 74mins.

I buy only the best; Maxell CD-R MusicPro 80, with multiple protective layers. ...Dark blue reflective coating. ...No problems ever with those, and they play in all my players.
I rarely buy CD-Rs for computers, with that light green reflective layer...they are inexpensive...and I don't know how long they'll last. Plus they don't play in all my players.

---------

---------

The written area is under the label side. A scratch on the read-side can sometimes be read-through with the laser. However, a scratch on the label side destroys data.

That's right; the side that needs the utmost care is the top label side. ...Scratch that, so that you can see through the disc, and you won't be able to play that section.
Solution: Stick a small piece of very thin sticker on top of the scratched section. ...Even a stamp would do.
The pits of the CD are closer to that top CD label than the underside of it. ...You can scratch the underside (rainbow reflective layer) and it won't affect the playback.

Some CD players are very good @ reading discs that are heavily scratched on the underside layer.

* A LP; both sides need careful attention. :b ...You don't want to scratch either side, unlike a CD.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Tape tastes better than vinyl.!!!!


View attachment 21050 View attachment 21051

I dunno. My ex had a chocolate record made for my birthday that was simply organic tasting!

 

[Don C]

There is analog sounding digital, and digital sounding analog!

The quality of the end result is not format dependent!

 

[ddk]

There is analog sounding digital, and digital sounding analog!

The quality of the end result is not format dependent!

Very true Don, but there's a reason why one descriptor is a superlative and the other inferiority!

david

 

[Don C]

Very true Don, but there's a reason why one descriptor is a superlative and the other inferiority!

david

Through speakers I prefer records.

However, after listening to both dead quiet vinyl, and CD/SACDs through STAX SR-009 headphones for the last year, I have had my doubts about vinyl's superiority.

 

[audio-land]

There is analog sounding digital, and digital sounding analog!

Prefer "analog sounding digital" (if any) instead of "digital sounding analog" (haven't heard one)

 

[TBone]

Prefer "analog sounding digital" (if any) instead of "digital sounding analog" (haven't heard one)

"Analog or digital sounding" is meaningless in terms of evaluating hardware, considering the software can be - either or - within any format.

 

[MylesBAstor]

"Analog or digital sounding" is meaningless in terms of evaluating hardware, considering the software can be - either or - within any format.

How about the digital copy sounding like tape it's made from?

 

[TBone]

How about the digital copy sounding like tape it's made from?

I've got such tape to digital copies on DSD. Not heard em yet, so I can't comment, and I'm not certain if DSP was used to filter out any possible tape hiss. I've had much experience with tape, but that was mostly pre-digital adoption. The last time I heard a R2R based system, it was playing a Steely Dan tape. Its back-to-front layering was something to behold, you could really hear the in-depth studio work. Digital reproduction has the potential to cull that kind of dimensional information, but that's impossible to realize at only the digital end of the comparison.

 

[TBone]

I assume you are referring to a prerecorded, commercially released, 71/2 ips Steely Dan tape?

As far as hiss, that's in large part a product of the late '50s large magnetic particles. Try to hear a new Yarlung tape. No hiss.

Sorry Myles, this happened a few years ago; although I was informed of all the above specifics at the time, I can't remember much past yesterday.

 

[JackD201]

Crazy how the ratio is remaining fairly constant as the votes come in.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Sorry Myles, this happened a few years ago; although I was informed of all the above specifics at the time, I can't remember much past yesterday.

What?

 

[amirm]

Crazy how the ratio is remaining fairly constant as the votes come in.

Which is a good thing since it indicates it is a proper barometer of our membership.

While typing this, let me just say how pleased I am with the results. No, I am not talking about the ratio of digital to analog for which, I have no emotions to share (not in competition with anyone here). But rather, how for the first time, a thread like this has concluded so peacefully. In any other context, or forum in the past, we would have deleted posts, received many complaints, potentially issued infractions, etc. Yet here, despite sharing our strong points of views, we all stayed above board and kept our conduct such that none of these actions were necessary. I hope everyone agrees that this is how threads should conclude, not the other way.

Indeed this is one of three such threads just recently where this has happened. I couldn't be more proud of our membership in this regard. Thanks to everyone for helping us accomplish what no one had done so before.

 

[PeterA]

Amirm, I noticed how you reversed the words "Analog" and "Digital" in the title thread and poll question. Was that done intentionally to address any biases? Do you think the results would have been different if you had used the opposite order in both? Finally, do you think the results would have been different if members were not allowed to post comments on the thread? Your insights as one who understands objective test results would be interesting to read.

 

[amirm]

Amirm, I noticed how you reversed the words "Analog" and "Digital" in the title thread and poll question. Was that done intentionally to address any biases?

Anyone who reads my posts and sees the constant grammer errors, missing words, screwed up sentences and such, should not be asking me that question. So no, it was not intentional.

Do you think the results would have been different if you had used the opposite order in both?

I don't know. Are you guys susceptible to subliminal messaging that way?

Finally, do you think the results would have been different if members were not allowed to post comments on the thread? Your insights as one who understands objective test results would be interesting to read.

My intuitive read of the forum matches the results we have achieved. At least going by vocal, frequent posters of the forum. As for statistics, we needed 63 right answers for 95% confidence in analog preference not being due to chance, i.e. people randomly voting. We have 71. So I say the voting is deliberate.

Whether this applies to the general membership which is the silent majority, it is hard to say. If those people don't post or vote, and disagree with the results, my suggestion is for them to become more active and be heard .

As for comments having an impact, I think the earlier results before much was posted was very similar to where we ended. So I say that is not a factor.

 

[jazdoc]

Anyone who reads my posts and sees the constant grammer errors, missing words, screwed up sentences and such, should not be asking me that question. So no, it was not intentional.


I don't know. Are you guys susceptible to subliminal messaging that way?


My intuitive read of the forum matches the results we have achieved. At least going by vocal, frequent posters of the forum. As for statistics, we needed 63 right answers for 95% confidence in analog preference not being due to chance, i.e. people randomly voting. We have 71. So I say the voting is deliberate.

Whether this applies to the general membership which is the silent majority, it is hard to say. If those people don't post or vote, and disagree with the results, my suggestion is for them to become more active and be heard .

As for comments having an impact, I think the earlier results before much was posted was very similar to where we ended. So I say that is not a factor.

As an aside; 'P' values may not be as reliable as many assume. I found this article pretty interesting and sobering:

http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-statistical-errors-1.14700