Why do we love vinyl more than digital?
- Thread starter Snoop65
- Start date
- Status
Sad? By all accounts you'd be happy at such an outcome coz you could peddle your tosh with far less impediment...
This is just a hobby, nobody dies, we have fun.Much of it is perhaps childish and silly; but look at it this way, most of us have lives which are tough and demanding.That is the nature of 'real life'.If we can escape into a harmless, fun, hobby, where is the wrong in that?
As for the sound of the ''three million dollar' system, it is a very fine system. as you would expect.Very detailed and dynamic, full of natural harmonics and with a pleasing sense of ease.Is it 'worth' the money? It is to the guy who bought it. Is it in any sense a 'best' system?How could you answer that? Is a maclaren f1 'better' than a Veyron? Beyond a certain point it is just about having something exactly to your taste. In that sense there can never be a universal 'best''.As I said, it's just fun and a lovely way to enjoy great music. Where's the harm, no matter how much or how little we spend it is the same hobby.
In fact it might be interesting to se how good a system we could build for a little money.That's actually a tougher challenge in some ways than 'sota.'
As for the sound of the ''three million dollar' system, it is a very fine system. as you would expect.Very detailed and dynamic, full of natural harmonics and with a pleasing sense of ease.Is it 'worth' the money? It is to the guy who bought it. Is it in any sense a 'best' system?How could you answer that? Is a maclaren f1 'better' than a Veyron? Beyond a certain point it is just about having something exactly to your taste. In that sense there can never be a universal 'best''.As I said, it's just fun and a lovely way to enjoy great music. Where's the harm, no matter how much or how little we spend it is the same hobby.
In fact it might be interesting to se how good a system we could build for a little money.That's actually a tougher challenge in some ways than 'sota.'
Nicely said , the best systems i heard did off course cost a "certain" amount of money
The owner/systembuilder is like an architect putting together a house , he uses materials (Room loudspeakers amplifiers sources ) to built a system .
Some are good at it and some not , its got to do with dedication ,expirience knowledge and talent , like with anything else really.
The owner/systembuilder is like an architect putting together a house , he uses materials (Room loudspeakers amplifiers sources ) to built a system .
Some are good at it and some not , its got to do with dedication ,expirience knowledge and talent , like with anything else really.
Last edited:
And yet large numbers of professionals who work with sound recording and reproduction every day seem to prefer the sound of digital (not 16/44.1, but still digital).
Merely responding to the presumption stated in the post. Whether it matters is another question.
At the risk of responding to the original post....
First my biases. I am heavily invested in both vinyl and digital. I seem to listen to digital exclusively in the car (CD, XM or hard disc). All things being equal, I would prefer digital for reasons of convenience, yet I listen almost exclusively to vinyl on my home rig. Why?
1. Quality of software.
This thread has focused primarily on hardware with little discussion of the software quality. We all know the downsides of vinyl as a software medium, but nearly 30 years in to the age of perfect sound forever, on the whole digital recordings seem less natural than their analog counterparts. Its a rare thing to find a modern recording that approaches the sound qualities from the pre-digital age. One thing that is rarely discussed in the negative effects of digital recording techniques on modern recording quality, i.e. the "loudness wars". On some level, even those who prefer digital seem to concede the point...To wit, there are no threads entitled "Analog that sounds more like digital"
2. Quantity of software.
Suffice it to say, there are simply vast quantities of excellent analog recordings that will never be available in a digital format.
3. The Listening Experience
Fremer summarized it well when he said that "No one remembers where they were when they downloaded a digital file."
We have friends over all the time for dinner, drinks and listening sessions. Most of these folks consider streaming Pandora through a Bose wave radio as the epitome of the modern listening experience. It's always fun to watch guests' facial expressions when the needle hits the LP for the first time...stunned amazement is the norm. Analog lends itself to a communal experience, sharing the album cover, etc. Digital tends to be a solitary, isolating experience. Analog involves the listener in the way the artist intended by experiencing a performance all the way through, i.e. listening all the way through or at least to a whole album side. Digital lends itself to skipping around. Universally, our friends can't wait to come back, have a quick dinner and get to the listening room ASAP...
This recent blog entry really captures the ethos: http://londonjazzcollector.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/charles-mingus-ah-um-1959-columbia-six-eye/
I would add that I enjoy tinkering and optimizing with analog set up. I understand for others, the "set and forget" nature is digital is a big plus. As always, to each his own.
First my biases. I am heavily invested in both vinyl and digital. I seem to listen to digital exclusively in the car (CD, XM or hard disc). All things being equal, I would prefer digital for reasons of convenience, yet I listen almost exclusively to vinyl on my home rig. Why?
1. Quality of software.
This thread has focused primarily on hardware with little discussion of the software quality. We all know the downsides of vinyl as a software medium, but nearly 30 years in to the age of perfect sound forever, on the whole digital recordings seem less natural than their analog counterparts. Its a rare thing to find a modern recording that approaches the sound qualities from the pre-digital age. One thing that is rarely discussed in the negative effects of digital recording techniques on modern recording quality, i.e. the "loudness wars". On some level, even those who prefer digital seem to concede the point...To wit, there are no threads entitled "Analog that sounds more like digital"
2. Quantity of software.
Suffice it to say, there are simply vast quantities of excellent analog recordings that will never be available in a digital format.
3. The Listening Experience
Fremer summarized it well when he said that "No one remembers where they were when they downloaded a digital file."
We have friends over all the time for dinner, drinks and listening sessions. Most of these folks consider streaming Pandora through a Bose wave radio as the epitome of the modern listening experience. It's always fun to watch guests' facial expressions when the needle hits the LP for the first time...stunned amazement is the norm. Analog lends itself to a communal experience, sharing the album cover, etc. Digital tends to be a solitary, isolating experience. Analog involves the listener in the way the artist intended by experiencing a performance all the way through, i.e. listening all the way through or at least to a whole album side. Digital lends itself to skipping around. Universally, our friends can't wait to come back, have a quick dinner and get to the listening room ASAP...
This recent blog entry really captures the ethos: http://londonjazzcollector.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/charles-mingus-ah-um-1959-columbia-six-eye/
I would add that I enjoy tinkering and optimizing with analog set up. I understand for others, the "set and forget" nature is digital is a big plus. As always, to each his own.
It really does come down to the quality of the room/system as a whole, and especially the quality of the turntable.
Funny, when I claim that my turntable has superior noise floor characteristics compared to my digital player, most audiophiles assume the impossible, or that my digital player is (add whatever negative comment here) ... when in fact it's one of the most transparent and quiet cdp's I've ever heard.
The fact is that noise floor "characteristics" are often defined by the ability to hear musical information within the noise-floor itself, a desired form of low level transparency that digital typically curtails. Depth of field, dimensional qualities, superior instrumental impact, even the perception of space thru silence ... these are all qualities that are rendered far better on my turntable ... despite the odd tick or pop.
tb1
Like I stated earlier, many audiophiles don't comprehend noise-floor issues in the same manner. Therefore, past your disclaimer, it's obvious that our perception and more importantly, our experiences regarding the subject matter ... is very VERY different.
tb1
This is hilarious - before discovering it, I hadn't quite realized the enormity of the threat Fremer must perceive from digital
At the risk of responding to the original post....
First my biases. I am heavily invested in both vinyl and digital. I seem to listen to digital exclusively in the car (CD, XM or hard disc). All things being equal, I would prefer digital for reasons of convenience, yet I listen almost exclusively to vinyl on my home rig. Why?
1. Quality of software.
This thread has focused primarily on hardware with little discussion of the software quality. We all know the downsides of vinyl as a software medium, but nearly 30 years in to the age of perfect sound forever, on the whole digital recordings seem less natural than their analog counterparts. Its a rare thing to find a modern recording that approaches the sound qualities from the pre-digital age. One thing that is rarely discussed in the negative effects of digital recording techniques on modern recording quality, i.e. the "loudness wars". On some level, even those who prefer digital seem to concede the point...To wit, there are no threads entitled "Analog that sounds more like digital"
2. Quantity of software.
Suffice it to say, there are simply vast quantities of excellent analog recordings that will never be available in a digital format.
3. The Listening Experience
Fremer summarized it well when he said that "No one remembers where they were when they downloaded a digital file."
We have friends over all the time for dinner, drinks and listening sessions. Most of these folks consider streaming Pandora through a Bose wave radio as the epitome of the modern listening experience. It's always fun to watch guests' facial expressions when the needle hits the LP for the first time...stunned amazement is the norm. Analog lends itself to a communal experience, sharing the album cover, etc. Digital tends to be a solitary, isolating experience. Analog involves the listener in the way the artist intended by experiencing a performance all the way through, i.e. listening all the way through or at least to a whole album side. Digital lends itself to skipping around. Universally, our friends can't wait to come back, have a quick dinner and get to the listening room ASAP...
This recent blog entry really captures the ethos: http://londonjazzcollector.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/charles-mingus-ah-um-1959-columbia-six-eye/
I would add that I enjoy tinkering and optimizing with analog set up. I understand for others, the "set and forget" nature is digital is a big plus. As always, to each his own.
Great post jazdoc!
Although I listen a lot to digital, it is the only way to enjoy more recent performances. And sometimes just because I am feeling lazy ...
I have to say that we all should have known better when we took the bait on this thread. We all should have known it was going to devolve into another analog vs. digital debate with both armies facing off against each other. It's just the nature of the beast. But what I find truly ironic is that the staunchest proponents of digital for the most part listen exclusively to digital. Most of them sold off their tables and LPs long ago (assuming they ever owned a table and LPs). Meanwhile back at the ranch, there are some of us who are invested in all of the formats both digital and analog and listen to them both on a regular basis in our homes in our rooms on our systems. We have a current frame of reference for where the different formats stand in comparison to each other. Some people are so close-minded on the digital side of the house that they want to argue that PCM sounds better than DSD even though they don't own DSD files and can't play them back.
in case anyone forgot this was the OPs question and what seems all too usual lately, the killjoys and haters show up when all we really want to know is why you love vinyl
In that case I suggest just changing the title of the thread to 'Why do we all love our vinyl?'. Problem solved
@mep - so owning SACDs and a player capable of playing them doesn't count as having DSD files?
In that case I suggest just changing the title of the thread to 'Why do we all love our vinyl?'. Problem solved
I tend to agree with that. Once you imply the comparison ("more than"), it becomes fair game for people with a digital bent to defend their position .. Take out the "more than digital"...
On that It is not an absolute that DSD is better than PCM. Not the case to me and I can't see the theoretical reason why it should. There is I will grant you a canyon between theory and practice but I can't see and do not share this view of DSD superiority. Nor do I share that of LP over digital anymore. I would like someone to point toward any theoretical superiority of DSD over PCM just to reassess my knowledge. My view is that DSD has serious faults (some would use "flaw" ) in its very basis.
Frantz-I make up my mind on where different formats stack up relative to each other based on hearing them and not looking at spec sheets and theoretical superiority. The proof is always in the pudding as they say. We don't hear spec sheets and theory, but we do hear how music sounds when we reproduce it over our gear in our rooms. I couldn't possibly explain why I think DSD sounds better than PCM based on specifications or theory. I can only relate what I hear and I'm not the only one who feels the same way. I own way more CDs and high-rez files (PCM) than I do DSD, but I certainly know which one I would prefer to listen to. Specifications and theory don't move me, but listening to music does move me.
- Status
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |