Vinyl / High qual analog tape / High-res digital -- One of these is not like the other

cleeds,
Just looking for his opinion.  As to your question, I don't have a dealer willing to do that and even if I did, I don't have any SACDs.  So, that's why.

i agree that these threads seek some sort of objective result, but that unless you are weapons free to approach these questions with unlimited resources we are going to have multiple "valid" if "not too useful" anecdotal based viewpoints. which is why i qualify my views.......and that your mileage may......and likely does.....vary....from mine. not many crazy enough to take my approach, even though many have that option.

Cleeds Asks;

This could be true, and it’s sometimes how digital sounds to me. So please tell us @mikelavigne : What is digital objectively missing?

objectively the things digital misses are the tonal and timbrel completeness of musical parts, the focused dynamic power of the music, and the inner musical pace and flow. the data density of analog is much higher. the continuous-ness and tonal density are better. the ability to separate musical parts and retain air and dynamic shading is better......especially when the music gets very dense and complicated.

this is what i hear when i compare my best analog to me best digital.

and you can add multiple channels of digital, and the analog still comes out net better. i have a 7.1.4 Dolby Atmos separate home theater system and honestly, even with all that firepower digital high rez still falls short of the musical connection of two optimized analog channels.

when i add a big screen i love my movies. but for music i’m out in the barn.

mikelavigne

... objectively the things digital misses are the tonal and timbrel completeness of musical parts, the focused dynamic power of the music, and the inner musical pace and flow. the data density of analog is much higher. the continuous-ness and tonal density are better. the ability to separate musical parts and retain air and dynamic shading is better......especially when the music gets very dense and complicated ...

Mike, we’re probably kindred spirits when it comes to this topic but for explaining our preferences. For example, when you say, "objectively the things digital misses ..." what you really mean is, "subjectively, the things digital misses ..."

Right?

If I’m wrong and you can objectively demonstrate this, please elaborate.

The one that’s missing the solid transparent soundstage, the puffy air, the correct tone of instruments, the bass frequency structure and slam, proper harmonic structure and warmth and sweetness of real music. That’s the CD system one. 

well; i have lots of digital and vinyl masters from the same tape source.

my darTZeel amplifiers have steady state and peak watt readouts on their face plates. readable from the listening position.

i can play the same recording back to back and see the peak readout in wattage. it’s not close how much more dense and dynamic the peaks are on analog. for that matter the tape is better then the vinyl.

a horn at full tilt, a drum whack.......

digital simply cannot muster the information at peaks. cannot do it. on paper it is suppose to be better. your engineering prof said it’s better. our friendly local goofball physicist said it’s better. but they were wrong.

and this difference is at the heart of every difference i speak about. digital is washed out and blunted relative to great analog. it’s a fact. you do have to have analog that can actually play back what is in the grooves or on the tape. and also proper resonance treatment so you are not blunting the peaks. i do have that treatment.