2. analog
  3. 1213991810

Vinyl vs. top-notch digital

I have never had an analogy rig. My CD player is a Meridian 800, supposedly one of the very best digital players out there. From what I've read, it appears there is a consensus in our community that a high-quality analog rig playing a good pressing will beat a top notch digital system playing a well-recorded and mastered CD. So here are my questions:

1) How much would one have to invest in analog to easily top the sound quality of the Meridian 800 (or similar quality digital player)? (Include in this the cost of a phono-capable preamp; my "preamp" right now is a Meridian 861 digital surround processor.)

2) How variable is the quality of LPs? Are even "bad" LPs still better than CD counterparts?

Thank you for any comments and guidance you can provide.
jeff_arrington
jaybo
4,478 posts
 
gentlemen...it has been my experience(over 40 years of record collecting) that on any given release, one format can sound better than the other. its a battle that gets fought one title at a time. records have always been ambitiously flawed, but lots of fun. the compact disc has shortcomings, but sometimes they do indeed sound as good or better. of course no compact disc player can replicate the 'feeling' of watching that record spin, but sometimes records are a pain in the ass. cool, but still a pain.
johnnyb53
3,510 posts
 
Pryso: I didn't mean to criticize your post. What you said is true. I was just trying to point out how the value of recorded music has dropped since moving to the digital age, and getting back into vinyl demands a reconciliation to the old relationship between music lover and software. Getting new LPs cost about the same in adjusted dollars as they did 30 years ago. From thrift shops and bargain bins, however, you can get whole albums ($1) for the price of a one-song download.

What's true regardless is that going to vinyl requires a different relationship to the software than if you source from CDs, servers, or downloads. It could easily cost more money, and it definitely costs more attention and especially, maintenance.
johnnyb53
3,510 posts
 

06-22-08: Rccc
I dont think its necessary or even wise to spend a ton on an analog rig to experience vinyl. My 2nd system is a technics dd with a shure V15/4 into a 25 yr old NAD int amp and is preferred to cd by everyone in the house.
That's what's going on at my house too, except my number one rig *is* a Technics direct drive. I have made some modest upgrades over the year (Cambridge 640p phono stage, Audio Technica AT150MLX and much faster, more transparent line stage), and now we enjoy both the smoothness and continuity *and* a higher level of resolution and detail.

My wife, who came from a strong background of vocal music, treasures all the operas and oratorios I've been about to pick up at the thrift shops for next to nothing. We always prefer the LP, and especially love it for vocals.
rx8man's avatar
rx8man
1,484 posts
 
A friend drove in from N.Y. to go listen to my other friends Walker T.T. into a pair of Avalon Radians today.

We spent well over six(6) hours continuous listening and at one point during the session,
we turned to each and I remarked "shit, our damn CEC/Museatex & Audio Aero front ends can't compete with this monster, no way."
david12
1,454 posts
 
"Now for some of the downside (as if cost is not enough) of vinyl for me. First of all, I hear very few speak to the issue of optimizing multiple sources within a single system. This is turning out to be a problem for me, I suspect I'll be working on this for a long time, perhaps I'll never be able to resolve it to my complete satisfaction." Sns

An interesting point from Sns. I have'nt seen it discussed and was not in fact, aware it was an issue. Do others think a system can only be optimised for CD or vinyl and not both? I presume he is saying, that the rest of the system, speakers, amplifier etc, can be optimised for one or the other. Do you think that is true? If so that opens up a large can of worms.
More to discover