I can't get no satisfaction ...... smile

Hello Vertigo .. I was speaking from a pure sonic prospective . I guess we all have different sonic perimeters that we value . I value a natural , neutral tonal balance with the just the right amount of musicality and superior bass performance , I have found that in digital in a way that analog just doesn't seem to convey . Clearly a personal preference . I have spent considerable time and money getting things just right , and it wasn't until the last two components were purchased and correctly voiced that the musicians entered my music chamber and player for me personally . ( Ayre KXR preamp and Ayre C5MP used as a transport ). When I traded in my LP's for CD's I always felt I would hear an analog rig that would bring me back to vinyl , but so far that hasn't happened , I do get allot of exposure to other system's being involved in an audio club . I think easy access was one of the reason's I original wen digital only but since then , sonic's and musical pleasure is my only concern . Regards Tim

Thanks...Tmsorosk.

I think its so difficult to exhaustively describe how one systems sounds. In a way i think its futile without actually hearing the system for oneself. What i mean is that i think alot of us at best have notions of what someone elses systems sound like. We might think it would sound great but when actually listening be underwhelmed or vice versa, even with components we are familiar with since no two systems are exactly alike. This might sound absurd but like no two wines are exactly alike neither do two systems sound exactly alike. I'm glad youre enjoying your system! All i can do is is keep heading on the course i am on and see where it leads me. I'm striving for something and i want to see if i can acheive it. I very well might be wrong but for now i believe vinyl is the right path for me for reasons stated in the last post.

There are times when the "song" is more important and you couldnt care less about the fidelity. Headphones, digital, vinyl, mp3, who cares....the song is more important.

Thats partly the kind of listener i am.

what i meant to say is...

I'm striving for something SPECIAL and i want to see if i can acheive it.

What was the most "extreme" cartridge you used when you had vinyl playback? That increases the likelihood of satisfaction but doesnt guarantee it but i am curious which you had.

I would still argue vinyl is superior but i bet alot of people havent heard a well put together system, that has synergy and is set up well, no wonder people prefer digital.

I understand the appeal of digital, even as i listen to it now through heaphones, its pretty good and is so "turn key" but its that last bit that it just cant seem to pull off, that i hear on my vinyl end but not always, though i hope to perfect that so that i get it more consistently.

I havent heard every digital front end in every system so in this regard i will suspend jugdement.

I not sure what you mean by extreme Vertigo , but the cartridge I liked best was a Lyra Helikon on a Simon Yorke table . I had a bunch of different phono stages , I think the ARC 3SE was the best match . Not state of the art but not bad , this setup made most of the early digital stuff sound sterile . I no analog has come along way in the last ten years but I think digital has come even further . The price of that 8 to 10 year old rig still outweighs my currant digital setup .
Maybe you can share with us which digital player and DAC you feel , "can't pull off that last bit ".
I have several friends that spent considerable time , money and resources upgrading a turntable rig , including dedicated high end turntable stands , not to mention considerable time matching and changing other components in there system . But when it came to digital just plunked down a mid priced CD player without proper setup or matching and announced it was inferior . I think if the same time and care was taken with digital the results would surprise many . I have also found that an audio system that has been setup and voiced using an analog source won't sound right when a digital source is introduced . Regards Tim

Tmsorosk,

Here's my experience with digital. I've heard emmlabs digital gear in someone elses system. A audio mechphisto one box player. A wadia 301 and i currently own a aero prima one box cd player.

The emmlabs combo , i believe it should be considered state of the art and is , what? 20,000? From memory, those systems were very resolving of instrumental timbral information but relative to what i am currently getting in my system now cannot deliver the same DEGREE of timbrel realism. I found that digital could give a high approximation of timbrel realism but in the final analysis it could not imitate the sounds of instruments that utilize woods, metals like a superb vinyl set up could.

A reference that i like to use is my all REAL wood gibson j45 and a unamplified marine band harmonica, unamplified in a quiet room. I pluck a string on my guitar and i hear the sitka spruce bodies midband warmth and its earthy tones. Some guitars are made from synthetic materials and they just cannot produce the tone of real wood guitars. Its those kinds of subtle differences that i strive to reproduce.

I'm just of the persuasion that "only materials that vibrate" can reproduce ideally "materials that vibrate"

Pluck a single string on my guitar once and let it decay til its silent. I would argue that that deceptively simple sound is extremely complex and has many components to it. (reflect on it for a moment)...Its sonic signature if stripped apart is very complex and extremely unique.

So again...I'm just of the persuasion that "only materials that vibrate" can BEST reproduce "materials that vibrate"ie, instruments made of wood, metals, ie guitars, pianos, harmonicas,etc.

What i mean is.... because cartridges are transducers made of MATERIALS,ie, wood, titanium, acrylics, that ARE INTENDED TO VIBRATE with the intention of, passing on information to imitate MATERIALS that VIBRATE themselves,a wood guitar for example , they have a inherent advantage because they are the same "things" AND a optical laser is not a material meant to "transcribe" information by the means of how it vibrates , it is therefore inherently inferior. I hold this belief in humility.

And...

Because cartridges are mechanical beasts who's performance is dependent on minuscule set up parameters it is easier to get them wrong more so than digital.

Someone can have a 5000 dollar cart, a 7000 dollar arm, a 10000 dollar turntable, etc, etc, but if the basic set up is slightly out or there is no synergy, your sound might be worse than a basic wadia 301 one box cd player! but that does not mean digital is better as i'm sure many have wrongly concluded.

I'm talking here about some very fine differences and very fine distinguishing cues and nuances. Maybe we feel we are talking about the same level of playback but in reality are not and thats the problem. Maybe all the analog set ups you heard were not executed very well.

I want to qualify all my comments on this thread by saying, that the things i have to say are dependent on how many or how few different "incarnations" of digital playback i have heard. That i have no comment on how good or how bad the emmlabs or any component is, i prefer to only comment on how those sounded in the context of a particular system.

So, though it may appear that i am making blanket statements, i am in fact not. I'm simply sharing my experiences in the narrow scope of my exposure to different sonic signatures of different systems.

Tim, in the final analysis I think and believe that each systems sound must be judged irregardless of whether or not it is a digital or analog front end and each on an individual basis, against every other... because other factors play a big part in the failure or success of a systems sound. It all comes down to how well a whole system is "executed" irregardless of format.

The things that make analog so potentially great is what also makes it so potentially bad. Sad, but i think true.

So, my bias is that cartridges have more potential to be better music transducers than digital files because they are like things they intend to imitate... they are things that vibrate.

And my EXPERIENCE thus far confirms that.

Probably the best digital i have ever enjoyed was watching nirvana unplugged on dvd through the rest of my system from a player that i picked up for $50 used on craigslist (at one time it retailed for 1200).

The sound was absolutely amazing.

That is a well recorded sparse sound and there is the visual cues too which all helped to create a wonderful spellbinding experience. Not to mention the songs themselves were great.

Tim, my opinions are not static or rigid, they are pliable and open to change.