Buy The Very Best Source You Can Afford

[Robonaut]

Hi,
I've found most surface noise on LP's can be removed with a proper cleaning (I use a VPI machine).

A VPI machine, huh? Jeez, I looked at their website and the cheapest one appears to be $500!! That seems like a hell of a lot to pay for something that just cleans your media.

Which brings me to another point--it appears to me that, for $150, I can get an Oppo universal player, run a HDMI connection to my pre-pro/receiver of choice and get stunning digital sound. Maybe not quite as good as the best digital players, but probably 95% of the way there (hard to quantify since I haven't done an A/B comparison).

In the world of vinyl, $150 will get you what? A decent cartridge, maybe?

Now, I'm not saying that people who like vinyl are wrong or deluded in any way (and sorry if any previous posts hinted at that), since I think that the whole point of this hobby is to find the sound that pleases you, whether it's accurate or not. I do, though, definitely know that vinyl just isn't for me.

 

[DTB300]

Which brings me to another point--it appears to me that, for $150, I can get an Oppo universal player, run a HDMI connection to my pre-pro/receiver of choice and get stunning digital sound.

For Redbook only, as it does not pass SACD or DVD-A signals.

In the world of vinyl, $150 will get you what? A decent cartridge, maybe?

While the Oppo is not too bad, you do get CD sound on the level you pay for.

But it just does not compare to my modified Sony 999ES player. Yes my player with mods costs $1000 more, but the differences to me are substantial and when we all talk about cost versus performance, this additional cost equates to the additional performance gains. And BTW, I have not heard a stock CD/SACD player under $4k that sounds better than my player.

Vinyl is the same way. You can get a nice TT and cartridge for little money and be able to play vinyl and be happy with it. But pay that extra money as I mentioned above, and the source will be substantially better.

But let me finalize by stating that cost of a component is not always the bottom line to how it will perform - the old cost versus performance equation that each of us has to decide on.

Dan

 

[Robonaut]

For Redbook only, as it does not pass SACD or DVD-A signals.

Actually, it does-->http://www.oppodigital.com/dv970hd/dv970hd_support.html

While the Oppo is not too bad, you do get CD sound on the level you pay for.

But it just does not compare to my modified Sony 999ES player. Yes my player with mods costs $1000 more, but the differences to me are substantial and when we all talk about cost versus performance, this additional cost equates to the additional performance gains. And BTW, I have not heard a stock CD/SACD player under $4k that sounds better than my player.

Do you connect your player using the analog or digital outs?

I would have no doubt that, using the analog outs on both players, the Sony would sound significantly better than the Oppo, since the Sony should have much better DACs. That's why I specified using the digital out on the Oppo--when using both players only as a transport, the sound differences should be pretty minimal.

 

[kwr]

That's why I specified using the digital out on the Oppo--when using both players only as a transport, the sound differences should be pretty minimal.

I had an interesting experience a couple of years ago. Sister-in-law was auditioning Meridian DSP 6000? speakers and they sounded pretty ordinary. Shop speakers came from told her she didn't know what good sound was. Shop from which she ultimately purchased the speakers suggested it could be the Meridian transport she was using.One of the guys dropped off the bottom of the line CEC transport and the difference was a big one i.e. something that you noticed straight away and for the better.


This was also one of those tacit lessons in service. My relative who could probably buy anything in the shop if she so wished got nothing but grief from the original shop. She had the specific agenda of the simplest cd system and was very clearly heading down the route of a Meridian system. The shop that suggested the CEC transport not only dropped it off but also assisted with setup, dropped off some DSP 5200 to audition when she wondered about the overall cost and eventually made the sale of the CEC, the bigger Meridians, a big LCD and swing arm to mount, a bedroom screen and KEF Kit system and a spare room screen and speakers and ht receiver and Playstation

So the effect of a transport can be enormous

Kevin

 

[jfm]

Ted Denney, head of Synergistic Research, said in a recent TAS interview that, in the future, he'll be listening to hard drives because "that's one of the best transports there is" ...having no jitter and so on.

That sentence has been ringing in my ears...

...and has driven me to research the Olive transport (slash cdp slash media server slash analog-to-digital converter)...

...while also thinking about how best to upgrade my record playing system...

This hobby can really sharpen one's decision making skills (or not!)...

 

[twich54]

A VPI machine, huh? Jeez, I looked at their website and the cheapest one appears to be $500!! That seems like a hell of a lot to pay for something that just cleans your media.

I do, though, definitely know that vinyl just isn't for me.

Robo, Good evening........ remember this, the value of alot of the members analog collection on this site far exceeds what some have in their ENTIRE audio system. That's the reason we don't hesitate to spend the money to protect it !!! heck, my collection is small in comparison to others (I have less than 2000 LP's and CD's) but I would hate to have to replace it, many of which I couldn't !!

I do agree that vinyl is not for everyone, as most young people today were brought up in the digital era. But then again it's Ok to be a "neanderthal" , Hell I still love Steam Engines !!!

 

[amey01]

This is a really great analogue / digital discussion. Can I make a request though? Can the analogue people please quantify why they believe analogue is better in a very rational manner?

Background: As an audiophile, i'm always interested in anything that can give me better sound. At present, I use digital (SACD) because of many of the reasons Dan (DTB300) states earlier in this thread. Most of my music is on digital, and I have the digital rig set up already.

If analogue can really give better sound then I am prepared to put the money and time into setting up a turntable, but so far, all I hear from analogue people is sweeping statements like "analogue is better", "analogue live forever", "analogue is the only way" without actually any unbiased comments to back it up. Sure, a top-line turntable might beat a top-line digital front end (in some (or all) areas of performance) but I'm talking real world stuff that you and I own.

I have listened to many modest and not so modest analogue rigs over the years, but none seriously. While I can appreciate it does do some things better than digital, such as being very musical and warm, it also does some things a lot worse than digital. Most obvious to me is a kind of soft distortion - and the fact that it just doesn't seem to do macro dynamics and bass as good as digital, not to mention the noise.

So from my totally unbiased opinion, I can connect with the music equally as well with either format, each with their own strengths. Given that, I will stay with CD/SACD as
1: All of my music is on these formats
2: These formats are easier to live with
3: These formats are universal - they can be played in the car/ipod/holiday house/etc
4: Having a digital rig already set up, I'd rather put the analogue money into a better source (digital) rather than another source.
5: More music is available for purchase

So come on, sway me!

 

[roberto]

This is a really great analogue / digital discussion. Can I make a request though? Can the analogue people please quantify why they believe analogue is better in a very rational manner?

Background: As an audiophile, i'm always interested in anything that can give me better sound. At present, I use digital (SACD) because of many of the reasons Dan (DTB300) states earlier in this thread. Most of my music is on digital, and I have the digital rig set up already.

If analogue can really give better sound then I am prepared to put the money and time into setting up a turntable, but so far, all I hear from analogue people is sweeping statements like "analogue is better", "analogue live forever", "analogue is the only way" without actually any unbiased comments to back it up. Sure, a top-line turntable might beat a top-line digital front end (in some (or all) areas of performance) but I'm talking real world stuff that you and I own.

I have listened to many modest and not so modest analogue rigs over the years, but none seriously. While I can appreciate it does do some things better than digital, such as being very musical and warm, it also does some things a lot worse than digital. Most obvious to me is a kind of soft distortion - and the fact that it just doesn't seem to do macro dynamics and bass as good as digital, not to mention the noise.

So from my totally unbiased opinion, I can connect with the music equally as well with either format, each with their own strengths. Given that, I will stay with CD/SACD as
1: All of my music is on these formats
2: These formats are easier to live with
3: These formats are universal - they can be played in the car/ipod/holiday house/etc
4: Having a digital rig already set up, I'd rather put the analogue money into a better source (digital) rather than another source.
5: More music is available for purchase

So come on, sway me!

Hola amey01...as you said to us, you have never being exposed to a good analgue gear. Everything it is a matter of taste and liking. Your first question, the answer is...the sound of everthing on the earth is analogue...vinyl is analogue. The noise is not part of the music, as the problems with digital format is...all I can say to you is listen it, but, don´t make any comparison...if you want to enjoy digital, you have to stop listening analogue!!! I hope this will answer your question. Happy listening,
Roberto.:musicnote:

 

[kwr]

Your hearing is closer to digital than analog in terms of nerve conduction. It is an impulse based mechanism. Signal packets discrete and time based.

Vinyl is a needle vibrating in a groove with the information being subjected to compression to allow the mechanistic nature of the vibrating needle to work. It has been made to work very well but to claim that sound is analog and vinyl is analog is an ill considered mantra.

To my ears vinyl has a pleasant soft focus distortion. It is pleasant but is not good enough to make me consider purchasing a turntable and vinyl. For people with large vinyl collections there is no question - the best setup you can buy as a good vinyl setup approaches a good digital setup.

Kevin

 

[amey01]

Hola amey01...as you said to us, you have never being exposed to a good analgue gear. Everything it is a matter of taste and liking. Your first question, the answer is...the sound of everthing on the earth is analogue...vinyl is analogue. The noise is not part of the music, as the problems with digital format is...all I can say to you is listen it, but, don´t make any comparison...if you want to enjoy digital, you have to stop listening analogue!!! I hope this will answer your question. Happy listening,
Roberto.:musicnote:

Thank you for your reply, but unfortunately it doesn't really answer my question. Sure, I've never heard a top-notch analogue system, but neither have I heard a top-notch digital system (Zanden, dCS, et al). I would expect a Continuum or top of the range Clearaudio to out-perform my modest Marantz SACD player, but why would I go out and spend $US3,000 on an analogue rig when I could sell the Marantz and spend $5,000 on a better digital source such as the Ayre C-5xe or the Goldmund SRCD3?

 

[risabet]

This is a really great analogue / digital discussion. Can I make a request though? Can the analogue people please quantify why they believe analogue is better in a very rational manner?

Background: As an audiophile, i'm always interested in anything that can give me better sound. At present, I use digital (SACD) because of many of the reasons Dan (DTB300) states earlier in this thread. Most of my music is on digital, and I have the digital rig set up already.

If analogue can really give better sound then I am prepared to put the money and time into setting up a turntable, but so far, all I hear from analogue people is sweeping statements like "analogue is better", "analogue live forever", "analogue is the only way" without actually any unbiased comments to back it up. Sure, a top-line turntable might beat a top-line digital front end (in some (or all) areas of performance) but I'm talking real world stuff that you and I own.

I have listened to many modest and not so modest analogue rigs over the years, but none seriously. While I can appreciate it does do some things better than digital, such as being very musical and warm, it also does some things a lot worse than digital. Most obvious to me is a kind of soft distortion - and the fact that it just doesn't seem to do macro dynamics and bass as good as digital, not to mention the noise.

So from my totally unbiased opinion, I can connect with the music equally as well with either format, each with their own strengths. Given that, I will stay with CD/SACD as
1: All of my music is on these formats
2: These formats are easier to live with
3: These formats are universal - they can be played in the car/ipod/holiday house/etc
4: Having a digital rig already set up, I'd rather put the analogue money into a better source (digital) rather than another source.
5: More music is available for purchase

So come on, sway me!

Givens: digital is more convenient, it certainly is more portable. Other than that I don't believe digital competes with vinyl.

Though I doubt you'll be swayed, here are some of the differences I hear between vinyl and RBCD as compared to the real thing which in my estimation is unamplified music played in a real acoustic space. This in no way indicts SACD/DVD-A which are in my opinion much better than RBCD but still not up to vinyl.

1. RB kills the high frequency "air", for lack of a better term, truncating the decay of instruments like cymbals and other high percussion instruments, making them all leading edge and no decay. Vinyl gives these instruments a better presentation and integrates the fundamental with the harmonic better, IMO. This integration makes the instruments more believable sounding and adds the dimension of space to the music that IMO digital doesn't provide.

2. The overtones of strings, woodwinds and brass instruments are "wrong." Violins, trumpets, flute all sound hard in their middle and upper registers compared to the real thing. Vinyl tends to be more correct in reproducing these overtones and when well done allows the listener to better differentiate between similar sounding instruments, e.g. English horn and oboe, violin and viola, trumpet and cornet.

3. Regarding the bass and dynamics of vinyl I would point you to the Classic Records 45 rpm reissue of Ravel's Alborado del Gracioso (LSC-2222-45) which is a reference for both wide dynamic swings and dynamic bass impact. Where CD falls off IMO is in bass dryness, yes bass is extended but, except for mega expensive unit such as the McIntosh separates, digital bass is dry and lifeless. Basses, the string type, don't sound like wooden instruments, organs lack the air and movement of the real thing and well balanced vinyl. Once again a type of dryness seeps into the music that isn't there in life or on well reproduced vinyl.

4. Regarding noise I would argue that for those of us who pamper our vinyl noise is rarely an issue. Yes we have RCM's, fluids, antistatic guns and numerous and varied brushes but for the vinyl lover these are part of a comforting ritual and make the music more enjoyable. The majority of my albums are perfectly quiet.

5. Taken together I find digital to be like a simulacrum of the real thing whereas analog (vinyl) is more like real instruments playing in real spaces. The warmth and tonal balance of vinyl is simply more consonant with the sound of real music as I hear it.

6. Some music that I think shows the superiority of vinyl when compared to CD are: 1. Brothers in Arms Dire Straits LP WB 125264; CD
2. Copland Appalachian Spring LP RR22; CD RR-22CD
3. Rickie Lee Jones S/T

 

[edwinr]

Am I wrong in thinking that you are listening to a ML DAC, as oppposed to your previous CD player's DAC ?

I guess both systems are equally capable of reading the 1's and 0's off the CD... it's what comes after that that matters. AFAIK, you could use ML's DAC and feed it the signal coming from your "old" CD player, and compare that to the situation in which the ML does all the job on its own.

I only used the ML's inbuilt DAC. I haven't tried any other CD player through this machine as yet. Mark Levinson's philosophy is that it's not difficult to retrieve the 0's and 1's. The tricky part is the subsequent processing of this data.

 

[garmtz]

The most entrancing digital I have heard was a heavily tweaked 47 Labs DAC and transport. I was listening to a performance, not to a digital device. It had all the best thing of analog (fluidity, tonal richness, timing, etc.), but was totally silent (of course). It made me rethink digital for the first time. The sound collapses a bit with big orchestral works and is laid-back, but it is magic nevertheless.

Actually, I have heard the No.39 and No.390 lot of times and they sound a bit lifeless in my ears. Perfect, but lifeless...

I am playing with a Resolution Audio Opus 21 myself, which I consider the best player < $10,000 and it costs half of that. I resembles the 47 Labs quite well, but is a bit more dynamic and less laid back.

 

[DTB300]

Actually, it does-->

Only for higher and compatible HDMI pre/pro units, which people have to be aware of. And remember Digital out, let it be CoAx, Fiber, or HDMI does not equate to "stunning sound". It all depends on the transport, DAC's, and processing circuits on the other end.

Do you connect your player using the analog or digital outs?

For the Sony: When I ran an external DAC, I used CoAx out for Redbook and Analog for SACD - CoAx always sounded better than Fiber with many different cables that I auditioned into the same DAC. Since the mods have been done, the Analog out is significantly better than the CoAx and DAC. For the Oppo, it is strictly a Video player for me in my setup to take some of the wear and tear off my 999ES.

I would have no doubt that, using the analog outs on both players, the Sony would sound significantly better than the Oppo, since the Sony should have much better DACs. That's why I specified using the digital out on the Oppo--when using both players only as a transport, the sound differences should be pretty minimal.

Transports can make a WORLD of difference in sound reproduction on players. But when talking about cheap players, transports are pretty much the same as (if I remember correctly) most of the cheap players use the same couple of drive/transport assemblies. So with cheap players "pretty minimal" would probably be valid.

Dan

 

[DTB300]

6. Some music that I think shows the superiority of vinyl when compared to CD are:
1. Brothers in Arms Dire Straits LP WB 125264; CD
2. Copland Appalachian Spring LP RR22; CD RR-22CD
3. Rickie Lee Jones S/T

Risbet...great post on your preferences of Vinyl over RBCD. You stated your preferences and reasons quite well!!

In regards to your CD's listed, I cannot comment on the comparison, but I will comment on the RBCD quality. I cannot comment on #3 as I never heard it. I have #2 on Telarc and while it is an ok CD, it is not anywhere near the quality of some of the other Classical CD's that I own. But then again, most of the Classical that I own is SACD, and I listen to them primarily in MCH, so to compare would not be fair.

[Rant begins...]
The Dire Straits RBCD is NOT a great sounding CD even in its remastered version or newly released RB Layer of the SACD. Yes, it won an award many years ago as the best CD of the year, but that same year DMP issued a CD by Flim and the BB's that was SIGNIFICANTLY better than BIA, yet, BIA won based solely, IMO, due to everyone knew Dire and no one knew Flim.

Same thing for the SACD of DSOTM by Pink Floyd. Everyone falls all over themselves about this CD and yet, it is not a great representation of what SACD can do (or good Redbook). I have some Stereo SACD's from the 1950's that blow away the sound quality of DSOTM. The MCH on DSOTM is interesting as it agressively uses all the channels, but it is more gimmicky than good quality.
[Rant ends...]

Risbet...I am not picking on you and your CD choices, you happened to mention the Dire CD, so I had to comment

Dan

 

[DTB300]

...... but why would I go out and spend $US3,000 on an analogue rig when I could sell the Marantz and spend $5,000 on a better digital source such as the Ayre C-5xe or the Goldmund SRCD3?

Save your money on the Ayre or Goldmund and look at the modified players (new or used) from Modwright or Vacuum State. These players for less money will outperform those listed players.

I have a friend with a Vacuum State modified player and it has 95% of the performace of the EMM Labs $15k setup, but for $11k less.

Dan

 

[DTB300]

With all our discussion on Vinyl and Digital, I must commend everyone on their posts and civil discussions were are having here. We all have our preferences and likes, and we all respects each others choices.

I do want to post a quote from Michael Bishop, a recording engineer for Telarc in reference to recording and playback systems:

"Unfortunately, the weakest link in any recording or playback system will always be the mechanical transducers, i.e.: microphones, speakers, phono cartridges & stylii. Everything else in-between is pretty easy to get right!"

If you want to read more of his post, here is the link:
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/hirez/messages/231499.html

Dan

 

[twich54]

With all our discussion on Vinyl and Digital, I must commend everyone on their posts and civil discussions were are having here. We all have our preferences and likes, and we all respects each others choices.Dan

Screw the civility, Lets have some bloodshed !!!!!!!!!!!!!.........................

Only Kidding !!!!!!

Dan, "Flim and the BB's", Loved Big Notes and TriCycle, their compulation CD "Vintage BB's" is a good collection of Jimmy "Flim" Johnson's work.

 

[roberto]

Thank you for your reply, but unfortunately it doesn't really answer my question. Sure, I've never heard a top-notch analogue system, but neither have I heard a top-notch digital system (Zanden, dCS, et al). I would expect a Continuum or top of the range Clearaudio to out-perform my modest Marantz SACD player, but why would I go out and spend $US3,000 on an analogue rig when I could sell the Marantz and spend $5,000 on a better digital source such as the Ayre C-5xe or the Goldmund SRCD3?

Right, good point...sometimes it is better to enjoy what we have and buy music instead of spending a lot of money for the search...I do understand and I am with you!...and I also have to say that I do:cheers: enjoy my digital goods as you do!...I wish you all a very happy listening,
Roberto.:musicnote:

 

[DTB300]

Dan, "Flim and the BB's", Loved Big Notes and TriCycle, their compulation CD "Vintage BB's" is a good collection of Jimmy "Flim" Johnson's work.

Big Notes was the CD that BIA was picked over. Tricycle on SACD is scary good.

Back in the early days of CD, DMP was a leader in putting out much better sounding CD's, and they had some great groups playing for them - mostly Jazz stuff by Flim, Thom Rotella, Bob Mintzer, Warren Bernhardt, Joe Beck, Billy Barber (Flim), Jay Leonhart, John Tropea, etc.

Dan