Has anyone been able to define well or measure differences between vinyl and digital?


It’s obvious right? They sound different, and I’m sure they measure differently. Well we know the dynamic range of cd’s is larger than vinyl.

But do we have an agreed description or agreed measurements of the differences between vinyl and digital?

I know this is a hot topic so I am asking not for trouble but for well reasoned and detailed replies, if possible. And courtesy among us. Please.

I’ve always wondered why vinyl sounds more open, airy and transparent in the mid range. And of cd’s and most digital sounds quieter and yet lifeless than compared with vinyl. YMMV of course, I am looking for the reasons, and appreciation of one another’s experience.

128x128johnread57

Hi there.

I’d like to ask @fair & @thespeakerdude to disengage from your conversation with each other. You have reached an impasse where no greater value is being added either to my original questions or each other’s position.

Again I want say thanks to both for your energy and effort to address the technical aspects of these questions.

But honestly, I learned somethings from each of you, and I respect you for maintaining civility. I ask that you and we need to move on. Please.

Id like to hear more diversity of thoughts and experiences here.

... A mathematical theorem is like a part of a legal contract: its words have precise meaning, often unexpectedly different from their everyday meaning; and it has small print ...

A math theorem is a principle that can be proven with math. The Fourier Transform is a theorem. It has been proven by both math and in actual implementation - it's the basis of both digital and analog audio. Your alternative paradigms aren't consistent with Fourier. You're probably having fun with your fanciful imaginings but that's all they are. If you want to make actual progress you'll have to accept the math. Anything else is futile and more than a bit silly.

@johnread57 , I was out a few messages ago.

 

I'm telling you that the errors are signal dependent, you are quoting this, and then are asking me to tell you exactly how big the errors are? 

You know, serious people run long simulations to answer this question for specific digitization schemes and sets of representative signals.

 

To quote @cleeds these are fanciful imaginings, not serious discussion points. Serious discussion points would come with serious analysis or serious links showing that analysis. 

 

@cleeds

A math theorem is a principle that can be proven with math. The Fourier Transform is a theorem. It has been proven by both math and in actual implementation - it's the basis of both digital and analog audio. Your alternative paradigms aren't consistent with Fourier. You're probably having fun with your fanciful imaginings but that's all they are. If you want to make actual progress you'll have to accept the math. Anything else is futile and more than a bit silly.

Let's make it more interesting. Shall we?

You likely know who Bob Stuart is:

 

Despite his lifelong achievements and indisputable expert status, audiophile community met MQA format he co-created with significant controversy, e.g. 

 

 

I propose reading a peer-reviewed paper he co-authored:

 

 

And then telling us what Tidal did wrong to further stir up the MQA controversy. And perhaps what Tidal and others can do in the future to improve the MQA situation. You may think it can't be improved, and this would be interesting to hear too. 

I hope the ensuing discussion would be very relevant to topic at hand, because Tidal and other "Ultra HD" music streaming services hasn't yet made a dent in LP sales, but I believe they may do so in the near future.