Too Late For Analog?

[garylkoh]

I respect and value your opinion but it is exactly the point I may have been trying to make .. What does "relaxed. musical" feeling means ? And I hope this comes with the utmost respect . I know how difficult it is to convey what one perceive with words. I would grant that the presentation are different ... So one may prefer one over the other ...

Frantz, I respect and value your opinion, but I have the same "musical feeling" as Bruce does. The even bigger problem I have is that I bought a CD of an album I love - Oscar Peterson's Nigerian Marketplace - and I prefer the digitized copy I made of the LP even though it was originally recorded in digital. At least Bruce has access to the master tapes. As an ordinary music consumer, I don't. May be it's because I'm blinded by preference, but now, when there's a CD I want, I hunt down the LP, and then digitize it.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I would not qualify CD nor LP as Tang ... The Tang metaphor is used to emphasize that people like what they like and the preferences are not necessarily objective. Even when they would be, the weight given to a given parameter appears so arbitrary or so random as to escape most casual or even critical analysis ... I don't like the Knicks but love New York. I like the Mets but not the Yankees... Love the Giants not the Jets... I am a Lakers fan big time but don't particularly like the city of Los Angeles ... etc .. No particular reasons.

I am not familiar with SACD and I must say that there is a certain amount of prejudice in that ... I find the process wasteful and I am not seeing the clear benefit of it in term of coding ... The amount of filtering required soes not make much sense to me over regular PCM ... I like the very high sampling rate though and it may have to do something with its often cited superiority especially its DSD 128 or DXD variant ... besides the DACs I have owned don't do DSD (are there any? maybe the Emm Labs...) I also find the catalog minuscule so ... no bother ....

Now I believe in multi-channel .. It has the potential to bring reproduction to a higher level... The logistics problems are not simple: for example I am not sure we know how to place the speakers for best performance ... especially when any audiophile worth his grain of salt knows how difficult it is to place TWO (2) speakers in a room can appreciate the difficulty in placing 7 ... the mind shudders ... the simplistic ITU arrangement is rarely possible in most rooms and what about room treatment so... MC I am on the fences

Hi-rez I buy them whenever possible ... If I like the music. Often It sounds no better than the regular low-rez ... a downer...

Tapes I had some but don't see myself investing in the Tape Project tapes ... HRx , yes...it could be be the mind of the engineer at work .. I know likely that in the case of HRx the copy is identical or can be made identical something I know can't be made with analog anything if a copy is involved it can be close can't be identical with digital it can be .. so I would be interested in digital masters whenever possible which I think that is what HRx is purported to be ... I haven't made the jumps to simply buy the whole HRx catalog ... Will buy more when I move to the Weiss DAC or other with handle HRx native no conversion to a lower rate like the Benchmark does ...

For me it is way too late for analog and that maybe all that I have to say about thaaaat

 

[FrantzM]

Tony Faulkner, a well known sound engineer specializing in classical music recording, openly expressed the same opinion about analog tape, even compared with the live feed :
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/5728089-post53.html

I am in a good mood today and for a long time have some free time so .. I am firing away .. I have replied to this reference I think in another thread ... I disagree with Tony Faulkner on this, big time ... and I mean HUGE, BIG, HUMONGOUS time .. Live feed is Live feed !!! He prefers it with added distortion! Well there comes back the Tang reference again and this time it is almost if a Chef would prefer it to real Orange Juice!!... The French have a saying : "Of tastes and Colors one doesn't discuss" (literal translation) it applies here ...

 

[RBFC]

In my opinion, only two of the OP's original concerns are of any value to argue. The other concerns are matters of debate.

1. Having little kids and a high-end TT is a recipe for eventual disaster. Perhaps if you run your household in a Gestapo-like fashion, and can keep them completely locked out of the music area, then a TT would survive unscathed. Otherwise, a constant sword of Damocles hangs above your valuable arm/cartridge assembly/investment.

2. I consider the acquisition of good-to-high-quality analog source material to be a time-intensive and expensive proposition. With the resurgence of interest in vinyl, prices for good-condition LPs of desire have increased substantially. Tape is a story unto itself. While the Tape Project undoubtedly provides very fine product, it is limited in both number and selection. Source material for both analog media are therefore a commitment to the hunt.

With digital high-resolution downloads becoming a reality, very good sound is approachable at reasonable prices. Since I've never heard a master tape, etc., I really don't know what all I've been missing. I certainly couldn't have a collection of those here at the house without the liberal application of firearms and force.

Lee

 

[Bruce B]

Bruce


I respect and value your opinion but it is exactly the point I may have been trying to make .. What does "relaxed. musical" feeling means ? And I hope this comes with the utmost respect . I know how difficult it is to convey what one perceive with words. I would grant that the presentation are different ... So one may prefer one over the other ...

I would put it on the same level as fingernails across a chalkboard. I know that's worse case scenario though. Whenever I listen to digital, I know the music is all there and such, but I have an uneasiness about my feeling and posture. I know guys dont' like to talk about "feelings" LOL
I call it the goosebump factor. Whenever I listen to good analog, I get goosebumps and the hair on the back of my neck raises. I've never gotten that with ANY digital. Don't know why. Digital is heads above analog in measurements. Just can't enjoy the music.

O'kay... just thought of an example. Patricia Barber - Cafe' Blue SACD. When she starts singing the high notes with more amplitude, I start to cringe with digital. Her voice just seems to soar with analog.

 

[jazdoc]

Frantz,

I admire your passion and respect your opinion. I have engineering and medical degrees and would like to think that my professional training has inculcated me with a healthy respect for the scientific method. However...

This ain't science, it's art. We may be using technology in the service of art, but it is still about art. In this case it's about how music can stir our souls (or not in some cases). I could try and prove to you that Beethoven is better than Mozart based upon some ratio of C#/B flat in their respective compositions, but does that really provide insight why I may prefer Mozart? Would you really want to waste your time trying to measure why you prefer one to the other?

I have absolutely no rational explanation why my preference is typically analog. But I can promise that when and if a digital format is better to MY ears, I'll enthusiastically adopt it without a requisite scientific imperative.

Despite my love of analog, I would be hesitant to recommend the OP jumping in for reasons outlined in my prior post...

 

[FrantzM]

I would put it on the same level as fingernails across a chalkboard. I know that's worse case scenario though. Whenever I listen to digital, I know the music is all there and such, but I have an uneasiness about my feeling and posture. I know guys dont' like to talk about "feelings" LOL
I call it the goosebump factor. Whenever I listen to good analog, I get goosebumps and the hair on the back of my neck raises. I've never gotten that with ANY digital. Don't know why. Digital is heads above analog in measurements. Just can't enjoy the music.

Fair answer ... I am Ok with that.. It is your preference ... not a profession of analog superiority Fine with me ...

Same applies to jazdoc last post ...and one of the many reasons why I waste so much time on this forum

I prefer Beethoven to Mozart and I am certain my reasons are not objective ... Mozart is clearly the great talent with a sense of Melody that is uncanny (and no you can't measure that with a stick) but Beethoven had that way with notes... He would use a few and make so much efficient use of them and grab your soul with only a few of these ...

The beginning of the Fift or the Appassionata are examples of what I am trying to put into words ...

 

[microstrip]

I am in a good mood today and for a long time have some free time so .. I am firing away .. I have replied to this reference I think in another thread ... I disagree with Tony Faulkner on this, big time ... and I mean HUGE, BIG, HUMONGOUS time .. Live feed is Live feed !!! He prefers it with added distortion! Well there comes back the Tang reference again and this time it is almost if a Chef would prefer it to real Orange Juice!!... The French have a saying : "Of tastes and Colors one doesn't discuss" (literal translation) it applies here ...

FrantzM,

Your reasoning has a mistake - the life feed is not the fresh orange juice, it is also a substitute. The orange juice (using your metaphor) is the performance in the studio. So, “Des goûts et des couleurs on ne discute pas” is even more true than before - both lifefeed and tape are just sound reproduction.

BTW, I am assuming that real Orange Juice is not Real Orange Juice ...

 

[microstrip]

In my opinion, only two of the OP's original concerns are of any value to argue. The other concerns are matters of debate.

1. Having little kids and a high-end TT is a recipe for eventual disaster. Perhaps if you run your household in a Gestapo-like fashion, and can keep them completely locked out of the music area, then a TT would survive unscathed. Otherwise, a constant sword of Damocles hangs above your valuable arm/cartridge assembly/investment. (...)

Lee,

It depends. When my two kids were children, my listening room was our family living room. Since they started walking, the kids moved among their father cables, speakers, amps and turntables and they never broke anything, except the exposed shinning tweeter of a B&W Silver Signature, damaged when my younger was about five. He clearly explained why - his finger get trapped between the protection and the dome - and he could not take it out! Happily it as very easy to replace.

BTW, I was happy that in those days no one would dare to design a turntable not having a solid hinged cover ...

 

[garylkoh]

I've broken far more cantilevers than my kids (now 7 and 9) have. My wife still gets the heebie jeebies when my son goes to lift the arm at end of side. My daughter's more clumsy, so she knows not to do it. My turntable does not have a cover.....

It's all about teaching them to love music from young, and responsibility. When my kids started to crawl, they would be around my system, and if they touch anything, I would put the music on pause, and un-pause then they stop. I've only ever had a single midrange poked in, and it was by one of their friends on a play-date. Now, my kids police their friends around the system.

 

[FrantzM]

Microstrip

.. A live feed has the least amount of distortion ... it is the input ...what is recorded is a transform of the Live Feed .. since bound by the laws of physics an imperfect If someone likes it ..he/she likes it ... The person however cannot affirm any superiority ... The person can only state his liking or preference ... so there you have it. Whatever you call the Live feed it has by the laws of physics to be closer to the original event than the tape reproduction ... I could daresay that this tells me the person prefer a somewhat more blunted reality.. Which by the way can be quite realistic , or could even be more enjoyable for a some or the majority ...but objectively better ? it isn't

 

[fas42]

The answer to the dilemma is simple: get rid of that quality in the playback that some people here are sick of me talking about: d!$^@>^ion (sorry to swear ...). Many here call it noise floor: what's in a name, it's still the same thing! Bruce gave the game away when he just said he doesn't like listening to digital, the problem that he's having is that he's hearing too much of that which is unmentionable. And I could not care less what your $100K measuring devices are telling you about the levels of that nasty stuff; it is still the real problem ...

Analogue wins for many simply because it is easier to get right, to get that "relaxed, musical" feeling happening, which is yet another term for low noise floor, and minimal critical d!$^@>^ion. It is no more, and no less than that ...

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I don't have time to read all the posts in this thread and I'm sure many have already disagreed with what I'm about to say, but here goes: I think there are two reasons to get into analog at this point:

1) You think you'll love the ritual fuss of of turntables and records (setting up, adjusting, trying carts, cleaning records...)

2) Quite a few contemporary pop/rock/country records get mastered loud and badly for CD and download, then remastered for audiophile release on vinyl. Not most, by any means, but the few artists who care about sound but have enough of a popular contemporary audience that they cave to record company pressure to produce stupidly loud masters for the masses.

Personally I find everything about #1 to be a pain. I don't even play CDs, I rip them immediately and play lossless files from a computer. Not very much of the music I listen to is affected all that much by the loudness wars. Yes, recordings overall are louder than they used to be, but I listen mostly to jazz, acoustic, Americana and classical and very little of it is over compressed and badly eq'd. My daughter turns me on to some contemporary rock from time to time, but even then, the kind of artists involved may produce records that are compressed and don't have great dynamic range, but the recording that is harsh and overdriven is the extreme rarity. Not that much of an issue.

So I guess my answer is "it depends..."

Tim

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Frantz,

i sit here and ponder how to bring something useful to this dialog. something that could relate my experience with this question that could actually move things forward. you want some sort of proof that analog is enough better to be justifyable. and not just for the OP.

nope. i got nothing. it's all been said.

i'll just offer another invite to you to visit me (should you ever be in the neightborhood) and spend time listening. i have all the formats optimized and ready to listen to. i can safely predict that were you to spend a few hours, that you would want to listen to Lps and tapes mostly after doing some format comparisons.

i have maybe 6 or 7 visits a month from many different audiophiles, over a number of years. many arrive with pro-digital biases. and they get wow'd by my digital. then we do Lps, and maybe a tape or two. there is then no more talk about digital.

but i have no proof of anything. i don't worry about proof.

on the subject of the thread, which i responded to early in the thread, i'd say 'it depends' on lots of things whether 'vinyl' is worth the effort. it can be.

 

[DaveyF]

My experiences are similar to Mike's. Every time a digital leaning a'phile has listened on my system to the digital set up and then the analog set up, the discussion usually veers towards how to get into analog, and which vinyl set up to start with

Don't get me wrong, i like digital for its ease of preparation and convenience, but when i want to seriously listen to my system, analog is where I go.

 

[microstrip]

Microstrip

.. A live feed has the least amount of distortion ... it is the input ...what is recorded is a transform of the Live Feed .. since bound by the laws of physics an imperfect If someone likes it ..he/she likes it ... The person however cannot affirm any superiority ... The person can only state his liking or preference ... so there you have it. Whatever you call the Live feed it has by the laws of physics to be closer to the original event than the tape reproduction ... I could daresay that this tells me the person prefer a somewhat more blunted reality.. Which by the way can be quite realistic , or could even be more enjoyable for a some or the majority ...but objectively better ? it isn't

You seem to forget that the main objective of sound reproduction - to recreate the experience, not to make physics demos. Understanding the laws of physics should help us to do make it better, but as the physics has to be convoluted with psychoacosustics, you cannot apply the rule that the less the better. A better sound should be judged by a better recreation.

The live feed is by no way the best version of the reproduction - as F. Toole says "That is where the professional recording industry steps in" .

Many tools to evaluate the better recreation exist, and some people have used them to ameliorate the sound reproduction. When I read that several professionals, whose advice I consider because I know of their professional work, not only because of their words, prefer the tape to any other form of recording and read why they prefer it, I can only think that digital still has some way to go. The reason for the tape preference should be technical, not philosophical, and the sooner it is understood the faster we will have state of the art digital - a digital that enables a better receation.

 

[FrantzM]

microstrip

I will answer your last post and fade in the background ... The thing is taking all the air of a discussion about faith... Science is invoked only when convenient to apparently support the faith .. Rejected if it doesn't fit ,so this will be my last on the subject ...

Reproduction of music is a physical process it is governed by physical laws. The mastering part of a production (not a reproduction mind you) is the creative part and all kind of things are added to create the illusion of ...whatever it is ... It can be subtle or substantial as many albums are "created" after the recording phase ... Regardless mastering or post-production is not just dropping a few percent of distortion on the live feed, it would seem to me, they are much more and yes Psycho acoustics plays a role , even there while this is an art Science plays its role ... The live feed is what I call the baseline, it is what I have to work with I can embellish it but it is what is: the baseline, Ideally I need as is then I can play with it. The tape is the recording device ... The tape adds quite a bit of distortion to the recording That is a fact .. Now one can be pleased by such distortion .. I have no qualms about that ... I object however to call the adding of that distortion a superior anything on the objective level.
Now these professionals you mentioned and whose works you admire may have a preference for tapes .. again that is fine .. I would not even bother, if their works are good to my ears I would appreciae or even like them. I could also name several producers and professional of the highest caliber who swear by digital and produce great works .. There is no unanimity ... It is matter of taste here one on which we try not to discuss (and fail repeatedly ) .. Lastly even mastering people who likes analog , would tell you that it is often a toss-up I believe that our own Bruce B, uttered such words in this thread ...

So when one states that digital is inferior, it is a profession of taste or an opinion. One a person can adhere to but can't prove with facts or to be moderate I haven't seen here proven with facts ... yet

@MikeL
I may swing by the West Coast later this year and intend to do good on your invitation. I am very interested in your speakers as you know ... I am also a sucker for great systems and yours definitely is one I will enjoy and it won't be one of those audiophile shoot-out where clips of music are played .. I can tell you that i will enjoy it and for several hours! Again thanks for the gracious invite and if convinced I will post about it.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I could also name several producers and professional of the highest caliber who swear by digital and produce great works .. There is no unanimity ...

Frantz,

i'll refer back to the recording session in my room a few years back, where 3 pro audio guys (Bruce Brown and 2 more from the Bay area) and Winston Ma spent 12 hours making hirez digital masters from a DTD Lp using 2 different hirez digital units. the 2 pro guys from the Bay area were quite surprised that hirez PCM could not reproduce what we were hearing from the Rockport. and it was not really that close. they both said they had never been exposed to high level vinyl and had no idea it could sound that good. we did dozens of test recordings, and the truth was there to hear.

i would love for your 'producers and professionals of the highest caliber' to go thru the same exercise and then tell me white is black. i think you give these folks too much credit for having spent the time to really know about this question. how many pro studios have top level tt's and phono stages.......almost zero would be my answer. that does not mean they are not good at their craft from the perspective of making their clients happy. and they are not exactly neutral in their professional agendas.

heck; even Steve Hoffman 'po-po's' RTR master dubs as 'not as good as the vinyl' on his forum......which is utter bull crap. his clients would not like him to bite the hand that feeds him. i get why that is clearly. so asking a producer or pro engineer who's bread is buttered by digital what is better is not exactly an objective situation.

i know that i don't look to today's typical pro audio guy for confirmation of my listening truths......

 

[BFlowers]

I appreciate all of the comments. Some of them are even relevant to the OP . Those who had specific advice seemed to lean toward not heading down the vinyl path. I'm somewhat surprised that more didn't suggest R2R or have an opinion regarding its superiority over other forms of reproduction.

 

[naturephoto1]

I appreciate all of the comments. Some of them are even relevant to the OP . Those who had specific advice seemed to lean toward not heading down the vinyl path. I'm somewhat surprised that more didn't suggest R2R or have an opinion regarding its superiority over other forms of reproduction.

Brian,

I have excellent vinyl and digital playback capabilities but would really like to get into R2R in many ways. I really like my Teres Certus/Soundsmith vinyl playback system, but it can be a bother to re-set up and keep everything performing at its optimum. I know right now I have to make the final adjustment on the tracking force on my tonearm/cartridge set-up. Maybe I will finally get that done tomorrow or in a few days. As to tape, for me, besides my somewhat limited space at this point for the machine and the additional preamp, and the additional cost of the equipment is the fact that there is only limited media that I would really like to add in this format.

Rich