Vinyl and Digital: How does the sound or listening experience differ?

[Al M.]

Have ever you made a video of your own system to confirm your reasons?

Not necessary. I already know all the problems with videos from extensive observation. If you really want, I can open another thread to discuss. Let's not derail this one.

 

[Al M.]

But amazing analog records create this bubble that brings the original event to life within it, and brings a tonal saturation which leaves digital behind in all the ways I value in audio.

I know what you mean. That is something I addressed in my earlier post from two days ago.

Great digital can also be very realistic, convincingly cast a scenario, even be tonally accurate - but it just presents it at a distance, and with some emotional distance as well. However, I would rather listen to an amazing digital recording of a piece of music, over a poorly pressed, compressed, bleached sounding record (of which there are many) and vice versa. But this is not a comment on digital vs vinyl, but of the intense variability of music releases.

The variability of vinyl pressings is certainly an issue.

 

[spiritofmusic]

I've been building a vinyl system again after 15 years of no vinyl. I am currently evaluating the differences between vinyl and digital. My vinyl system is more pedestrian I think than anybody debating here, but I've been working really hard to have it transcend its roots, and have succeeded to a degree I am happy with. One of my best tools lately is comparing digitally recorded music on both record and high resolution files on my digital front end. This is allowing me to hear more precisely what the differences are, without the difference of analog vs digital. Hence I can hear where my vinyl falls short, and vice versa.

In my system currently, vocals sound fuller and more present on vinyl, universally. Soundstage and imaging is also wider, deeper, and more realistic. Bass is different, but I chalk that up more to shortcomings on my vinyl rig, and maybe to the summing of bass channels. On some material those qualities are not enough to make me like the vinyl better, all things considered. Overall on high quality sounding digital recordings, the differences are quite small if both the the pressing and the digital file are top quality.

But amazing analog records create this bubble that brings the original event to life within it, and brings a tonal saturation which leaves digital behind in all the ways I value in audio. Great digital can also be very realistic, convincingly cast a scenario, even be tonally accurate - but it just presents it at a distance, and with some emotional distance as well. However, I would rather listen to an amazing digital recording of a piece of music, over a poorly pressed, compressed, bleached sounding record (of which there are many) and vice versa. But this is not a comment on digital vs vinyl, but of the intense variability of music releases.

You're describing my system very well as well.
Every time I reduce noise in my system, sort power and acoustics, the system both digital and analog takes a step up.
What I'm noticing above all is there is so much variability from one LP to the next, CD somewhat less polarized. But across the broad range of albums, CD has the edge on consistent upticks, LP the edge on amazing upticks.
Yet, there's a whole swathe of LPs that provide an extra level of magic CD can't get near, the DG Original Source reissues being the best example.
In summary, CD is hugely enjoyable across the board, LP spans a lot more "meh" to WTAF???!!!

 

[spiritofmusic]

I know what you mean. That is something I addressed in my earlier post from two days ago.



The variability of vinyl pressings is certainly an issue.

I've just received what I consider one of the worst sounding LPs I've ever heard, an album that was never on vinyl to start, so I've had three decades of CD-only listening existence.
Rush "Test For Echo"
Appalling sounding is an insult to the word appalling.

 

[Al M.]

I've just received what I consider one of the worst sounding LPs I've ever heard, an album that was never on vinyl to start, so I've had three decades of CD-only listening existence.
Rush "Test For Echo"
Appalling sounding is an insult to the word appalling.

There are duds, for sure.

I love John McLaughlin's Live at Ronnie Scotts (2017) on CD. Yet when I heard it on LP I was heavily disappointed (it was also clearly a different mastering). Yes, it sounded warmer, but it also had lost any of the bite and energy that I appreciate on this kind of jazz rock, and while it sounded more relaxed, it also sounded immensely more boring. The rhythm itself was too relaxed. Guitar sound was also boring. I could never live with that sound. Yes, the music sounded "nicer", but at the same time it had lost all its purpose and drive.

This is uncharacteristic of vinyl, since vinyl usually has this great rhythm & timing that in the past left digital in the dust. In the meantime, some digital has caught up, including mine.

 

[Tuckers]

There are duds, for sure.

I love John McLaughlin's Live at Ronnie Scotts (2017) on CD. Yet when I heard it on LP I was heavily disappointed (it was also clearly a different mastering). Yes, it sounded warmer, but it also had lost any of the bite and energy that I appreciate on this kind of jazz rock, and while it sounded more relaxed, it also sounded immensely more boring. The rhythm itself was too relaxed. Guitar sound was also boring. I could never live with that sound. Yes, the music sounded "nicer", but at the same time it had lost all its purpose and drive.

This is uncharacteristic of vinyl, since vinyl usually has this great rhythm & timing that in the past left digital in the dust. In the meantime, some digital has caught up, including mine.

One dramatic example in my system is an original era Talking Heads Speaking in Tongues (I bought it when it was released) and a 24/96 resolution version released about 10 years ago. The digital wipes the floor with the vinyl.

 

[Ron Resnick]

In my system currently, vocals sound fuller and more present on vinyl, universally.

+1

But amazing analog records create this bubble that brings the original event to life within it, and brings a tonal saturation which leaves digital behind in all the ways I value in audio.

+1

 

[microstrip]

Considering the recordings that have been referred in previous post I would also probably pick vinyl over digital. However when I listen to recordings such as the Monteverdi Vespro della Beata Vergine, symphonic and orchestral music, including Xenakis or contemporary music (!), or anything that I have solid references in real performances, in my system I will pick digital for its true expressiveness, tonal balance, flow and accurate sound stage. All IMO, YMMV.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Considering the recordings that have been referred in previous post I would also probably pick vinyl over digital. However when I listen to recordings such as the Monteverdi Vespro della Beata Vergine, symphonic and orchestral music, including Xenakis or contemporary music (!), or anything that I have solid references in real performances, in my system I will pick digital for its true expressiveness, tonal balance, flow and accurate sound stage. All IMO, YMMV.

disagree.

 

[Kofi Baffour]

disagreeing doesn't make you correct. he is right as orchestral stuff have the most use for dynamic swings so you need a lot of headroom and digital is what provides that headroom. there's a reason that genre embraced digital the first cos they couldn't be happier to get rid of the limitations to recording to vinyl

No orchestral master I have heard on vinyl has sounded better than the digital counterpart

 

[Mike Lavigne]

disagreeing doesn't make you correct. he is right as orchestral stuff have the most use for dynamic swings so you need a lot of headroom and digital is what provides that headroom. there's a reason that genre embraced digital the first cos they couldn't be happier to get rid of the limitations to recording to vinyl

digital equaling musically significant headroom is a laugh. you read too many white papers 'or' don't listen to enough vinyl or tape. the musical drive that analog provides is where the music comes alive. the energy. YMMV.

 

[microstrip]

disagree.

Well, thanks for your 5 seconds of attention - probably 3 if you type fast.

 

[Kofi Baffour]

digital equaling musically significant headroom is a laugh. you read too many white papers and don't listen to enough vinyl or tape. the musical drive that analog provides is where the music comes alive. the energy.

uhm I said earlier in this thread that I sold my vinyl collection after getting CDs or Bluray Stereos or hi res downloads of my favourite albums because of how much better they sounded to me and you're going on a tangent that has no merit here? How did White Papers become relevant when it came to what I personally experienced?

lol what?

 

[Kofi Baffour]

Considering the recordings that have been referred in previous post I would also probably pick vinyl over digital. However when I listen to recordings such as the Monteverdi Vespro della Beata Vergine, symphonic and orchestral music, including Xenakis or contemporary music (!), or anything that I have solid references in real performances, in my system I will pick digital for its true expressiveness, tonal balance, flow and accurate sound stage. All IMO, YMMV.

nice to come across a Monteverdi enjoyer

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Well, thanks for your 5 seconds of attention - probably 3 if you type fast.

you and i have enough history on this subject to write a book. you can likely recite my perspective in your dreams.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

nice to come across a Monteverdi enjoyer

me too, on both digital and vinyl.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

uhm I said earlier in this thread that I sold my vinyl collection after getting CDs or Bluray Stereos or hi res downloads of my favourite albums because of how much better they sounded to me and you're going on a tangent that has no merit here? How did White Papers become relevant when it came to what I personally experienced?

lol what?

not all vinyl or digital hardware and media is created equal. there are many valid viewpoints on how they compare. i have mine, you have yours.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

uhm I said earlier in this thread that I sold my vinyl collection after getting CDs or Bluray Stereos or hi res downloads of my favourite albums because of how much better they sounded to me and you're going on a tangent that has no merit here? How did White Papers become relevant when it came to what I personally experienced?

lol what?

apologize. i should have written 'or' instead of 'and'. some get their perspective from reading, others from listening.

 

[microstrip]

you and i have enough history on this subject to write a book. you can likely recite my perspective in your dreams.

In fact I only comment on facts you post. The books have been written by others ... Fortunately I do not remember dreaming about sound reproduction, but I surely do not listen 8 hours a day to stereo.

 

[Anton D]

Approaching this subject as a "we are all friends here" thing.

I will add more subjective bloviation....

Digital has fantastic channel separation. Vinyl, great, but less. For many people, this may benefit vinyl: I think getting speaker placement just right is tougher with digital. Maybe vinyl's lesser channel separation makes speaker placement slightly less crucial for many...making a more pleasant experience regarding imaging.

Vinyl is also more prone to even order harmonic distortion, which, with tubes, we may find more pleasing than digital.

I like a three dimensional soundstage. In the grand scheme of things, this is more important to me than other parameters...if trade offs need to be made. I like/love it with vinyl but, sometimes, digital can be positively eerie.