Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[Lagonda]

There are pros that claim the exact opposite
That digital is the closest to the original recording .
Everyone hears differently and have different preferences

I bet you are a reborn deity, maybe audiogod, up to your old tricks again, keep going and prove me right ! P.s. Ked has come to the same conclusion, and he has "total recall " and photographic memory ! Busted !

 

[tima]

I don't stream, but what you stated is the same context of what folks mean when they say they can discover new music via streaming. Aside from searching for themselves the platform I believe , someone correct if appropriate, also makes suggestions based upon your genre(s), artists and track selections

Could you please say this another way -- not sure I understand.

 

[tima]

well, more like "new to me" (in my case). Since I enjoy reading the biographies of jazz musicians, I can follow along listening to what they listened to and were influenced by as well as more easily follow their own musical development. The reading experience therefore becomes richer and more meaningful.

I love to read about composers, performers and the history of of music. I agree that it can very much enrich the enjoyment of listening. Shostakovich, Heifetz, Beethoven, Horowitz, Sibelius . .. I'm just reading off my bookshelf. But I don't read and listen together.

 

[tima]

It's not only about "new music". Digital provides easier access to older music as well.

When I say 'the primary argument for streaming is access to new music', I'm just going on what I read here. No doubt you can sream Brothers in Arms.

 

[Al M.]

I love to read about composers, performers and the history of of music. I agree that it can very much enrich the enjoyment of listening. Shostakovich, Heifetz, Beethoven, Horowitz, Sibelius . .. I'm just reading off my bookshelf. But I don't read and listen together.

Agreed. I love to read about music too, and I don't think reading and real listening go together well either, especially with complex music like classical and jazz. Score reading and music go well together.

 

[Lagonda]

When I say 'the primary argument for streaming is access to new music', I'm just going on what I read here. No doubt you can sream Brothers in Arms.

Stream, CD, vinyl, remastered audiophile vinyl, that record will never sound good, to much early digital in it's DNA !

 

[Al M.]

Stream, CD, vinyl, remastered audiophile vinyl, that record will never sound good, to much early digital in it's DNA !

Yes, Brothers in Arms is pretty forgettable as recording.

 

[hopkins]

Agreed. I love to read about music too, and I don't think reading and real listening go together well either, especially with complex music like classical and jazz. Score reading and music go well together.

You don't need to do the two simultaneously.

I find myself looking for music that I read about (whether in books, articles, forums, YouTube channels...) all the time. It's not always easy to find what you are looking for, even with everything that's online, but it would be so much more difficult in an all analog world.

Once you do find what you are looking for, then you can decide whether you like it, want to own it (if possible), and in which format (if the choice is available).

 

[PYP]

I love to read about composers, performers and the history of of music. I agree that it can very much enrich the enjoyment of listening. Shostakovich, Heifetz, Beethoven, Horowitz, Sibelius . .. I'm just reading off my bookshelf. But I don't read and listen together.

I didn't write that very clearly. While reading, I can pause to build a playlist for later listening.

The only person in our household who can read and listen together is my wife. She can be in another room reading and later will make specific comments on something I was listening to. But women are known to be able to listen to two conversations simultaneously (something I have witnessed).

 

[Mike Lavigne]

When I say 'the primary argument for streaming is access to new music', I'm just going on what I read here. No doubt you can sream Brothers in Arms.

I think there are dozens of reasons to stream and why people enjoy it. access to new music is a big one, but this subject is not simple. 'new music' can mean diving deep into a particular artist, or a genre, or a composition, or an instrument, or each member of a group, etc, etc. streaming also provides lyrics, and other cover versions of most tunes. and multiple versions of the same recording, and recording details of many tracks. really unlimited information....when you are in the mood.

in addition streaming can easily allow for multiple playlists and your recent history and listening time by period. if you can't recall a particular tune the search function is remarkable. a very big thing.

then there is high performance playback, at all sorts of resolutions. and steaming is constantly taking baby steps forward in performance with updates. it is getting better and better. it where the economic focus is for development.

so one can lose themselves into streaming for all sorts of strictly musical reasons.

streaming can be very cost effective to have unlimited access to any music, not just new music.

or even because you are not in the mood, or maybe you are not capable, or getting up to change physical media. so it accommodates you and your situation, and does not dictate the terms of or degree of ease of use.

I only relate this stream of consciousness to make the case that streaming is very much more than a simple ' new music' thing.

it's even a source of community as people can share discoveries real time and it can be a glue for relationship building. an easily shared experience.

I'm sure there are many reasons for streaming I've not touched on.

I have an enormous investment and commitment to physical media based formats, so streaming can be all it can be, yet physical media also has it's rightful place. we don't need to denigrate one to love the other. it's great to live at a time when we have all these fantastic choices. it's a great time for music reproduction lovers.

 

[Mcsnare]

I think that you can find a few decades old posts of mine on the internet stating that, but unfortunately most audiophiles are blinded by ignorance. I remember telling MikeL back when he used to say that digital was “dumbing it down” how ironic that statement was.

The thing is, it’s an ever changing situation. Forums tend to bring out black or white positions when the truth is gray.

I would have agreed 100% with Mikel in the 90’s and into the early 2000’s. Back then digital recording was mostly hideous sounding to me. A subtle but definite perception of un-musical wrongness. Most of the recording systems in wide spread use had a weird harmonic dryness that defied the use of conventional eq and creative compression.

I was a top class digital hater in those days.
Then a funny thing happened: it got better. Slowly but surely just about every year the sounds of those digital systems improved.
By around 2003 or so ProTools was tolerable.
By 2012 I had very few sonic bones to pick with digital recording and mixing. I think home playback has followed a similar developmental curve.
With the best current systems and available tools, digital music production can be very close to sonically flawless IMO. But don’t take that to mean I think most of the new popular productions are good sounding! Sadly, just the opposite.

Does recording to tape have some special sonic magic to it? It sure does! But that doesn’t mean it’s all that accurate.
Vinyl is the same for me and it’s why I listen to records about 90% of the time. Some stuff off streaming sounds fantastic to me, but the vast majority is anywhere from poorly done or early crap digital to clean with no major flaws but it just doesn’t make me wanna listen.

In my experience, if you lined up a bunch of musicians and engineers for a well constructed A/B of tape vs digital recording, a smaller percentage will pick the tape as sounding better. I’d also wager that the same digital preffering group will pick vinyl in a well constructed, records vs streaming A/B as being better sounding.
Well done vinyl just has more mojo and engagement to me. Accurate, it ain’t.

 

[Carlos269]

The thing is, it’s an ever changing situation. Forums tend to bring out black or white positions when the truth is gray.

No this is not true. I’m not sure of your technical background but digital technology and mechanical transcription is pretty black and white to me and those with a scientific and engineering background.

I would have agreed 100% with Mikel in the 90’s and into the early 2000’s. Back then digital recording was mostly hideous sounding to me. A subtle but definite perception of un-musical wrongness. Most of the recording systems in wide spread use had a weird harmonic dryness that defied the use of conventional eq and creative compression.

I was a top class digital hater in those days.
Then a funny thing happened: it got better. Slowly but surely just about every year the sounds of those digital systems improved.
By around 2003 or so ProTools was tolerable.
By 2012 I had very few sonic bones to pick with digital recording and mixing. I think home playback has followed a similar developmental curve.
With the best current systems and available tools, digital music production can be very close to sonically flawless IMO. But don’t take that to mean I think most of the new popular productions are good sounding! Sadly, just the opposite.

I’m not sure if you are trying to be diplomatic here but “The vinyl has some added deficiencies AND enhancements that I like.” has always been the case since the advent of analog playback so misdirecting the conversation to a discussion on old digital production processes does not address or change the facts that vinyl playback adds euphonic distortions. If you were an expert witness in court you would be politely told to stick to the relevant facts and avoid the distractions. Circumstantial and implementation shortcomings in old digital production processes do not change the facts that one method is intrinsically more accurate than the other.

Does recording to tape have some special sonic magic to it? It sure does! But that doesn’t mean it’s all that accurate.

Of course tape recording & playback during the recording production was/is part of the vinyl sound as its inherent dynamic compression and other distortions are embedded in the recordings that become part of every vinyl release.

Vinyl is the same for me and it’s why I listen to records about 90% of the time. Some stuff off streaming sounds fantastic to me, but the vast majority is anywhere from poorly done or early crap digital to clean with no major flaws but it just doesn’t make me wanna listen.

I think that you said it all when you said “The vinyl has some added deficiencies AND enhancements that I like.”

In my experience, if you lined up a bunch of musicians and engineers for a well constructed A/B of tape vs digital recording, a smaller percentage will pick the tape as sounding better. I’d also wager that the same digital preffering group will pick vinyl in a well constructed, records vs streaming A/B as being better sounding.

You went from speaking truths to trying to defend a flawed playback form. Sorry to say but it diminishes the character that you had originally portrayed.

Well done vinyl just has more mojo and engagement to me. Accurate, it ain’t.

Sure, I enjoy the sound of vinyl, actually, I love the sound of vinyl, but I know better than to think that vinyl playback is as accurate as digital. Let’s not kid ourselves or mislead others. Facts are facts.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

No this is not true. I’m not sure of your technical background but digital technology and mechanical transcription is pretty black and white to me and those with a scientific and engineering background.

I’m not sure if you are trying to be diplomatic here but “The vinyl has some added deficiencies AND enhancements that I like.” has always been the case since the advent of analog playback so misdirecting the conversation to a discussion on old digital production processes does not address or change the facts that vinyl playback adds euphonic distortions. If you were an expert witness in court you would be politely told to stick to the relevant facts and avoid the distractions. Circumstantial and implementation shortcomings in old digital production processes do not change the facts that one method is intrinsically more accurate than the other.

Of course tape recording & playback during the recording production was/is part of the vinyl sound as its inherent dynamic compression and other distortions are embedded in the recordings that become part of every vinyl release.

I think that you said it all when you said “The vinyl has some added deficiencies AND enhancements that I like.”

You went from speaking truths to trying to defend a flawed playback form. Sorry to say but it diminishes the character that you had originally portrayed.

Sure, I enjoy the sound of vinyl, actually, I love the sound of vinyl, but I know better than to think that vinyl playback is as accurate as digital. Let’s not kid ourselves or mislead others. Facts are facts.

Carlos follow any one of the Links in Dave’s signature. He is qualified.

 

[Rensselaer]

No this is not true. I’m not sure of your technical background but digital technology and mechanical transcription is pretty black and white to me and those with a scientific and engineering background.

I’m not sure if you are trying to be diplomatic here but “The vinyl has some added deficiencies AND enhancements that I like.” has always been the case since the advent of analog playback so misdirecting the conversation to a discussion on old digital production processes does not address or change the facts that vinyl playback adds euphonic distortions. If you were an expert witness in court you would be politely told to stick to the relevant facts and avoid the distractions. Circumstantial and implementation shortcomings in old digital production processes do not change the facts that one method is intrinsically more accurate than the other.

Of course tape recording & playback during the recording production was/is part of the vinyl sound as its inherent dynamic compression and other distortions are embedded in the recordings that become part of every vinyl release.

I think that you said it all when you said “The vinyl has some added deficiencies AND enhancements that I like.”

You went from speaking truths to trying to defend a flawed playback form. Sorry to say but it diminishes the character that you had originally portrayed.

Sure, I enjoy the sound of vinyl, actually, I love the sound of vinyl, but I know better than to think that vinyl playback is as accurate as digital. Let’s not kid ourselves or mislead others. Facts are facts.

I am dismayed by this ongoing argument that converting the pure analogue master tape signal to digital, then back to analogue, then cutting to vinyl is in any way more accurate (or better sounding) than that same pure analogue master tape cut directly to vinyl without all that manipulation. It’s illogical.

I have no problem with the music industry developing digital music and selling it on CD’s , the many uses of the MP3 format and digital streaming, but why oh why did they have to adulterate the sound of vinyl records by processing the analogue into digital then back to analogue and cutting that to vinyl (and diabolically, never indicating such on the record cover). Was it simply the cheapest way of cashing in on the much smaller vinyl market despite already having the majority share of the music sales with CD’s? Why ruin our hobby? Was it just to discredit in order to eliminate any serious competition?

So now, after 40 years of diluting the vinyl market with absolutely inferior digital-to-vinyl products, costing me £thousands at the used record store selling on those barely-used horrible-sounding digital on vinyl monstrosities, digital producers have finally developed a digital format which may (I have found only one example through listening tests so far) be able to compete with pure analogue vinyl, that being DSD-256.

 

[Carlos269]

Carlos follow any one of the Links in Dave’s signature. He is qualified.

Yes, that’s why I’m calling him out. He knows better and stated truths at first but has weaken his position to the classic audiophile stance. Given his first hand experience, he is doing a disservice to the forum community by perpetuating myths.

 

[Carlos269]

I am dismayed by this ongoing argument that converting the pure analogue master tape signal to digital, then back to analogue, then cutting to vinyl is in any way more accurate (or better sounding) than that same pure analogue master tape cut directly to vinyl without all that manipulation. It’s illogical.

I have no problem with the music industry developing digital music and selling it on CD’s , the many uses of the MP3 format and digital streaming, but why oh why did they have to adulterate the sound of vinyl records by processing the analogue into digital then back to analogue and cutting that to vinyl (and diabolically, never indicating such on the record cover). Was it simply the cheapest way of cashing in on the much smaller vinyl market despite already having the majority share of the music sales with CD’s? Why ruin our hobby? Was it just to discredit in order to eliminate any serious competition?

So now, after 40 years of diluting the vinyl market with absolutely inferior digital-to-vinyl products, costing me £thousands at the used record store selling on those barely-used horrible-sounding digital on vinyl monstrosities, digital producers have finally developed a digital format which may (I have found only one example through listening tests so far) be able to compete with pure analogue vinyl, that being DSD-256.

You should give DSD512 and DSD1024 from HQPLAYER a listen. It is beyond what has been possible in the past. Low level and inner detail that can only be yielded through advanced digital processing.

 

[Audiofile]

If most if not all masters from the past 30 years are digital
What advantages does vinyl has vs digital ?

 

[facten]

Could you please say this another way -- not sure I understand

What my original post meant was that for you new music is music that you are unfamiliar with. When streamers speak about finding new music they are also mostly meaning that as well. New music isn't necessarily synonymous with 'today's music".

 

[Republicoftexas69]

Yes, that’s why I’m calling him out. He knows better and stated truths at first but has weaken his position to the classic audiophile stance. Given his first hand experience, he is doing a disservice to the forum community by perpetuating myths.

So you claim, that is what the ignore feature is for. Using it on you AGAIN!

 

[PYP]

Since the topic of streaming has already been raised...One advantage is ease of sharing the music with others in the household (that is, using one system vs. distributing music throughout the house which is a different topic).

It makes me curious about whether vinyl lovers allow other folks in the home to put on a record. When my father introduced us to classical music via a TT, tubes and mono-speaker, putting a record on was verboten. Records were sacred objects only handled with the greatest of care, and washed with water and a soft sponge, but actually placing it and playing it was one man's domain.