CD's vs Vinyl - Finally hear the difference

I am not convinced that one medium consistently out performs the other.

Personally I have had digital all over the place from $2,500.00 to well over $60K in my set-up including the PlayBack, to me up against my vinyl set-up there just no comparison, it's back ground music.

Dev

Wow! That's a lot to pay for background music.

" My problem is with those who maintain that correct set-up is less commonly sighted than a unicorn."

Thats funny even with its overtones of sarcasim and arrogance. Problem is neither can be seen, but one of them can be heard. You believe what you wish based on opinion which you are entitled to, I'll continue to believe based on the questions asked here, and on 2 other sites, the people I know and what they constantly hear as I do in requests for help, and the 2 dealers I know who people show up with a table they did not buy from them or the new catridge bought elsewhere they cannot set up properly yet are objectionable to pay for their service without purchasing anything from them.Perhaps one should consider just how many new to vinyl users there are. Much like when many of us were new users and did not know yet how to set up a rig.

"Vinyl can tend toward being one of those cabalistic corners of the hobby that for some becomes a shelter for elitist attitudes."

Perhaps with the altitude it took to think the above you should sell those elite looking rigs you own and buy a unicorn. The reality is any elitests opinions usually fly in the face of general concensus and fact.

So I guess I will have to take your word for it that everyone knows how to properly set up a table and those that can't are rarer than a no left nut three legged dog named Lucky living in a trailer park in Tapeka Kansas.

Cheers

Timrhu, it wasn't that way originaly. My Reference set-up in the end listed @ approx $50K and is absolutely AMAZING!

What took place was that on my journey keeping an open mind listening to many different rigs most with vinyl set-ups I heard just didn't do it for me and I preferred my Red-Book by far and then I happened upon a couple of individuals that changed all that peaking my interest enought that I started my new journey to see.

It's been interesting indeed, so much so that my Reference Red-Book in the end just sat really not being used, only when people would come over and they wanted to hear it so we started off listening. Besides eye candy appeal the pces the sound was as I wrote above amazing and I won't take anything away from it but ....

Once I put on my vinyl game over, myself being the host would personally expearience first hand the responce from anyone who listened.
In my set-up you didn't have to try and hear the differences, it's obvious.

My system for years was set-up around Red-Book and the only thing that changed was adding my vinyl.

In the end I decided to sell it all off, I'll get something down the road so I can play pces from my collection or for others who drop by but I'm in no hurry for now, so that's my reasoning for calling it background music.

Okay, I over-reacted to Dev's post. But what got me going is also evident in Dev's last post-- that to surpass your reference digital system required a "new journey" into analog with esoteric equipment or set-up skills. (You are still a bit mysterious on how those "few individuals" you met along your new journey "changed all that." Can you share specifics?)

Your experience suggests that the "debate" between digital and analog formats is only definitive at the extreme margin. This is a reasonable conclusion that makes hay of blanket assertions often found in LP vs. CD discussions.

I happen to agree with you, but from the different perspective of customizing components. During a long process there has been hopscotch between RBCD and vinyl, up to the point that, yes, vinyl is more revealing(which is not to suggest that RBCD at this level is objectionable or background music.) However in view of the mutability of things I hesitate to post a Q.E.D. to the journey.

Mapman is certainly onto something when he suggests that the points of convergence between analog and digital in a system are remarkable. I've passed through a few such points, and when there is further divergence, the divergence is smaller than before but more meaningful, since more of what was wrong on both paths has been purged through the evolutionary process.

The remaining differences between formats on my system are fairly small but meaningful. TT has more subtle texture and truth of timbre, and(with a superb linear tonearm) tracks uniformly across LP. CD delivers on its original promise: dead quiet blackground, wide channel separation, LF heft that surpasses TT on some recordings, neutral across FR without a trace of the anomalies and tracking issues that dog all but the best cartridges. The spatial ECM LP and CD jazz catalog offers interesting comparisons on these points. Denser more dynamic R&R and classical material sounds more delineated and less confused on LP. Yes, for the most "serious listening"(whatever that means) one turns to LP. BTW, experimentation in CDP with the ESS 9018 32-bit Sabre DAC chip suggests that in digital, if not in analog, the latest is the greatest.