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

[213Cobra]

Thanks for the reply. It is not so common to find audiophiles who do this - I use an amp that has a single digital input… I have an M2Tech Joplin, but unfortunately the DSP became glitchy, and I decided to try it as a pure ADC with an analog phono stage (Phasemation, entry model) and have not bothered getting it fixed since then (I rarely play non RIAA records…). I was curious about the Puffin as well.

For one of my tonearm/cartridge chains I used a Joplin Mk II phono ADC into Young Mk III DAC. It was sonically quite persuasive and easy to listen to, but the Joplin was relatively noisy as its one downside. This was 2017-2020. The m2tech chief engineer was forthcoming that more noise needed to be wrung out of the Joplin, which I believe was addressed in the 2023 Joplin Mk III. I may find one just to find out. The Parks Puffin and Blackwing are much quieter, and the EQ customizations as well as the phono setup tools included are quite useful. But you have to cloak it from analog police.

Phil

 

[hopkins]

For one of my tonearm/cartridge chains I used a Joplin Mk II phono ADC into Young Mk III DAC. It was sonically quite persuasive and easy to listen to, but the Joplin was relatively noisy as its one downside. This was 2017-2020. The m2tech chief engineer was forthcoming that more noise needed to be wrung out of the Joplin, which I believe was addressed in the 2023 Joplin Mk III. I may find one just to find out. The Parks Puffin and Blackwing are much quieter, and the EQ customizations as well as the phono setup tools included are quite useful. But you have to cloak it from analog police.

Phil

I have the 2023 version, with the external power supply. I could only compare the ADC with some cheap models, so I have no real benchmark. I suspect the DSP implementation may be the weaker point. I would be curious to try the Puffin. We could swap - just kidding

 

[Daro]

Yes, optimizing for one source, often analog, seems to be a factor. I have digital as my only source, and my system is optimized around it (system details in my signature below, visible on phone if turned sIdeways), including speaker set-up.

I am very pleased with the result, and my personal perception is that it compares favorably to the vinyl playback that I have heard countless times in other systems, also in terms of the "natural freshness" that you mention.

Congratulations on a very interesting system and your satisfaction. The Mola Mola Tambaqui is a very good DAC!
I have Mola Mola monoblocks.

I'm constantly experimenting.

I was recently positively impressed by the Grimm MU2 at a show; the sound surprised me.

 

[Al M.]

Congratulations on a very interesting system and your satisfaction. The Mola Mola Tambaqui is a very good DAC!
I have Mola Mola monoblocks.

I'm constantly experimenting.

I was recently positively impressed by the Grimm MU2 at a show; the sound surprised me.

Thank you!

I haven't heard Mola Mola amps, but I do know that recent class D can sound excellent and highly musical. I have heard the PranaFidelity purna amp -- also based on a Bruno Putzeys design -- on my PranaFidelity speakers, and other class D amps as well.

Count me impressed.

 

[Daro]

Thank you!

I haven't heard Mola Mola amps, but I do know that recent class D can sound excellent and highly musical. I have heard the PranaFidelity purna amp -- also based on a Bruno Putzeys design -- on my PranaFidelity speakers, and other class D amps as well.

Count me impressed.

Thx,
my other speakers need more power

 

[mtemur]

Dear @hopkins and @213Cobra,

A phono output—or any analog signal—passed through an ADC–DAC chain has audible effects. The organic nature of the original analog signal and its lifelike quality diminish depending on the quality of the ADC and DAC used. One thing, however, is certain: a signal that has passed through ADC–DAC does not sound the same as the original analog signal before conversion. If you hear otherwise, you simply need better equipment to reveal the differences. The effect is very audible. There is no such thing as a truly “transparent” ADC or DAC. That claim is nonsense. I know this because I’ve tested it myself.

Analog additions in the signal path are no different in principle from their digital counterparts such as ADCs and DACs. The reality is that anything added to the signal path—digital or analog—is audible. Even digital processing applied to a signal that already exists inside a computer is audible. Hard drives and USB sticks have their own sound signatures. Copying or moving files between computers, or transferring them over the internet, also affects sound quality. The effect of digital processing or add-ons is almost always in the same direction: toward a more “plastic” presentation that wipes out organic character.

 

[Al M.]

Dear @hopkins and @213Cobra,

A phono output—or any analog signal—passed through an ADC–DAC chain has audible effects. The organic nature of the original analog signal and its lifelike quality diminish depending on the quality of the ADC and DAC used. One thing, however, is certain: a signal that has passed through ADC–DAC does not sound the same as the original analog signal before conversion. If you hear otherwise, you simply need better equipment to reveal the differences. The effect is very audible. There is no such thing as a truly “transparent” ADC or DAC. That claim is nonsense. I know this because I’ve tested it myself.

Analog additions in the signal path are no different in principle from their digital counterparts such as ADCs and DACs. The reality is that anything added to the signal path—digital or analog—is audible. Even digital processing applied to a signal that already exists inside a computer is audible. Hard drives and USB sticks have their own sound signatures. Copying or moving files between computers, or transferring them over the internet, also affects sound quality. The effect of digital processing or add-ons is almost always in the same direction: toward a more “plastic” presentation that wipes out organic character.

Of course, nothing is completely transparent. A vinyl pressing and its playback are not completely transparent to the original analog tape either.

 

[hopkins]

Dear @hopkins and @213Cobra,

A phono output—or any analog signal—passed through an ADC–DAC chain has audible effects. The organic nature of the original analog signal and its lifelike quality diminish depending on the quality of the ADC and DAC used. One thing, however, is certain: a signal that has passed through ADC–DAC does not sound the same as the original analog signal before conversion. If you hear otherwise, you simply need better equipment to reveal the differences. The effect is very audible.

See below

There is no such thing as a truly “transparent” ADC or DAC. That claim is nonsense. I know this because I’ve tested it myself.

I did not make the claim, and I don’t claim that everyone who tries this will come to the same conclusions.

My use case is very specific since I use an ADC but the digital signal itself is not converted back to analog (it is used to control a power supply that directly drives speakers). In other words, I use an ADC, but dispense with a preamp, amp, and associated interconnects. So if there is a slight loss of fidelity in an ADC it could be compensated by avoiding even greater losses “downstream”…

If you introduce a DAC into the equation, then you are introducing a slew of potential issues. Saying that you have tested it yourself is not really convincing…or at least it does not turn your experience into a universal truth.

There are quite a few audiophiles who agree that the qualities of vinyl are preserved even when using an ADC/DAC. Are the results exactly the same? Probably not.

 

[mtemur]

Of course, nothing is completely transparent. A vinyl pressing and its playback are not completely transparent to the original analog tape either.

Exactly.

 

[mtemur]

There are quite a few audiophiles who agree that the qualities of vinyl are preserved even when using an ADC/DAC.

Probably because they don’t have good enough equipment either.

My use case is very specific since I use an ADC but the digital signal itself is not converted back to analog (it is used to control a power supply that directly drives speakers). In other words, I use an ADC, but dispense with a preamp, amp, and associated interconnects. So if there is a slight loss of fidelity in an ADC it could be compensated by avoiding even greater losses “downstream”…

What makes you think that using digital or PWM signal to drive speakers actually sounds better than converting it to analog and using a conventional amp to drive?

Additionally in your case there is a similar conversion at the speaker end. More importantly PWM amps or digital amps in general are extremely low in sound quality, lifelike character compared to regular SS amplification even when a DA conversion added. If you believe otherwise I can’t help you.

 

[Lee]

Lee, I read this sentiment in many threads and over the last few years. I started this thread not because I’m looking for what people think is best or what they prefer. I started the thread to learn how people describe the differences they hear between the formats. It sounds to me as though you’re suggesting that you do not hear any differences and that they have converged at the highest level. Is that your opinion, that your preference depends on the actual recording, and that neither format at this point has a strength or weakness? Or do I not understand what you are saying?

Let me answer it this way. I love both reference vinyl and reference digital. I listen to vinyl more than digital and tape a bit less due to a limited library.

I do think the ADC to DAC conversions are a limiting factor to digital but the Varese seems to have solved that to my ears.

But my comment above was to suggest the mastering quality is a big determinant of sound quality.

 

[MrC.]

Pondering this more since last time. There is something that a vinyl playback system does to the sound that isn't part of the actual music signal that seems to have a salutary effect on the playback experience.

As I've thought about this thread, I think there is an artifact with vinyl that really adds to the frison of the sound. It will seem crazy: when listening to vinyl, take a listen to silent moments - before the first song starts, between cuts, etc.... and those silent parts still produce something that is perceptible - the noise of the groove, the stylus interacting with the LP, the step up circuitry, whatever, that seems to add some low level ambiance that is pleasant. (On Kind of Blue, records seem to add an effect that enhances the feeling of space or place vs. digital experiences I have had with that music.)

Obviously, this is not really part of the musical content at all, so I am praising LP playback for a flaw, really, but it's something that seems to maybe alert the ear that something sonically cool is happening, or, who knows, maybe low level 'rumble' creates a false sensation of enhanced space (like a good woofer can do,) I dunno. It's hard to try to put my finger on it, but since we are all friends here, I thought I'd toss it out. I think vinyl artifacts maybe tend toward being a little euphonic.

****

Edited to add: maybe there is a characteristic of vinyl playback that acts like 'dithering' on digital playback to make the sound more enjoyable. (Could vinyl artifact be introducing some low level random noise (like dithering) that makes us able to feel as though we hear smoother sound and add the sensation of 'preserving detail?'

I believe this. I prefer the vinyl pressing of the digital master of Led Zepplin II to the best digital version. There can be many reasons in the signal chain but using high latency and reclocking through a computer I still prefer the vinyl press of a digital remix. Same with modern Brian Eno pressings. Same with 24 bit files of Grand Funk or Free.

Vinyl either introduces or omits some aspects of sound that my ear finds to be more harmonious to any digital I’ve yet heard. Sorry to those offended by my musical choices.

 

[Lee]

As others have stated, our opinions on this subject will vary based on…

1. The quality of our overall playback system in terms of resolution.

2. Source quality.

3. Mastering quality of the recording. If vinyl, also pressing quality.

4. Resolution of the format being tested…DSD? PCM? What word length and sample rate?

5. Our individual sonic preferences.

6. Power cord and line conditioning and grounding quality if different among the sources.

7. Our individual exposure to state of the art analog and digital sources in a well-setup system.

 

[hopkins]

Probably because they don’t have good enough equipment either.

Ok, I’m convinced!

What makes you think that using digital or PWM signal to drive speakers actually sounds better than converting it to analog and using a conventional amp to drive?

Additionally in your case there is a similar conversion at the speaker end. More importantly PWM amps or digital amps in general are extremely low in sound quality, lifelike character compared to regular SS amplification even when a DA conversion added. If you believe otherwise I can’t help you.

No there is no conversion at the speaker end - it is not a “PWM or digital amp”. You are talking about things you clearly know nothing about, so let’s move on.

 

[Al M.]

The effect of digital processing or add-ons is almost always in the same direction: toward a more “plastic” presentation that wipes out organic character.

This is a problem in particular with streaming, a problem that is not always solved. For the time being I stick with physical digital playback in my system, and leave streaming to laptop listening with headphones.

 

[mtemur]

This is a problem in particular with streaming, a problem that is not always solved. For the time being I stick with physical digital playback in my system, and leave streaming to laptop listening with headphones.

+1

 

[hopkins]

This is a problem in particular with streaming, a problem that is not always solved. For the time being I stick with physical digital playback in my system, and leave streaming to laptop listening with headphones.

In my setup streaming and local files (and the few CD players I have tried) sound essentially the same. I know, this could mean that my setup sucks, but in fact there is no reason why the same CD could not sound just as good (or bad) streamed from a provider or from a computer sitting in one’s home. So if one hears differences between the two, it could also be indicative of a problem with one’s setup… Who knows where the truth lies?

As for CD versus files, there are also pros and cons, and I would challenge anyone to demonstrate why one would be superior to the other.

 

[mtemur]

Ok, I’m convinced!

No there is no conversion at the speaker end - it is not a “PWM or digital amp”. You are talking about things you clearly know nothing about, so let’s move on.

What is the name and model of the amplifier you own that amplifies a digital signal but is neither a “digital amplifier” nor PWM?

If it is truly a pure digital amplifier, the signal remains digital only up to the point where it leaves the amplifier at the binding posts. The loudspeaker then inevitably converts that signal into an analog waveform. A musical audio signal is vibration by nature, and analog.

So there is absolutely a conversion at the speaker end. In this context, you are actually talking about things you clearly know nothing about.

 

[microstrip]

This suggests to me that the simpler recording setups of Decca (Wilkinson), Mercury (Fines) and RCA (Layton) engineers is a significant factor -- as you suggest, nowadays too many microphones. (...)

Surely we have great recordings made with simply recording setups. But they depended on particular hall acoustics and many wise, well though manipulations. If we are happy to survive on a diet of Decca (Wilkinson), Mercury (Fines) and RCA (Layton) and can't appreciate the also great, but different, work of modern engineers, we can go forever praising the great old days.

 

[microstrip]

Dear @hopkins and @213Cobra,

A phono output—or any analog signal—passed through an ADC–DAC chain has audible effects. The organic nature of the original analog signal and its lifelike quality diminish depending on the quality of the ADC and DAC used. One thing, however, is certain: a signal that has passed through ADC–DAC does not sound the same as the original analog signal before conversion. If you hear otherwise, you simply need better equipment to reveal the differences. The effect is very audible. There is no such thing as a truly “transparent” ADC or DAC. That claim is nonsense. I know this because I’ve tested it myself.

Surely, as we say all the time there is nothing transparent in an hobby where a simple signal cable change can give headaches to some audiophiles.

Analog additions in the signal path are no different in principle from their digital counterparts such as ADCs and DACs. The reality is that anything added to the signal path—digital or analog—is audible. Even digital processing applied to a signal that already exists inside a computer is audible. Hard drives and USB sticks have their own sound signatures. Copying or moving files between computers, or transferring them over the internet, also affects sound quality. The effect of digital processing or add-ons is almost always in the same direction: toward a more “plastic” presentation that wipes out organic character.

IMO you are addressing aspects that depend on the DAC being used, not intrinsically on the digital format . For many listeners, suppression of some analog artifacts sounds like "less organic".