2. analog
  3. 140184-113812

Turntable got absolutely crushed by CD

Long story short, i've just brought home a VPI classic 1 mounted with a Zu-Denon DL103 on JMW Memorial 10.5 with the appropriate heavier counterweight. Had everything dialed in..perfect azimuth, VTF, overhang, with only a slightly higher than perfect VTA. Levelling checked. All good. 

I did a comparison between the VPI and my Esoteric X03SE and it's not even close. The Esoteric completely crushes the VPI in all regards. The level of treble refinement, air, decay, soundstage depth and width, seperation, tonality, overall coherence is just a simply a league above from what I'm hearing from the VPI. The only area the VPI seems to be better at is bass weight, but not by much. 

I'm honestly quite dumbfounded here. I've always believed that analogue should be superior to digital. I know the Esoteric is a much pricier item but the VPI classic is supposed to be a very good turntable and shouldn't be a slouch either. At this point I feel like I should give up on analogue playback and invest further in digital. 

Has anyone had a similar experience comparing the best of digital to a very good analogue setup?

Equipment:
Esoteric X03SE 
VPI Classic, JMW Memorial 10.5, Zu-DL103
Accuphase C200L
Accuphase P600
AR 90 speakers

Test Record/CD:
Sarah McLachlan - Surfacing (Redbook vs MOV 180g reissue)



chadsort
solypsa's avatar
solypsa
462 posts
 
I setup a lot of tables...including all manner of customer supplied hardware. It's a bit tough to say 'vta is a bit off'. Imho it's really off until it's close...then its only close till its right. And getting it right is not particularly easy. The stock Denon stylus is pretty easy compare to some but still.

Like said before....change loading and experiment with vta.
And yes the Denon is good but not great....

cakyol's avatar
cakyol
940 posts
 
Why did you ever believe analog is superior to digital ?
Apart from some "superhumans" here on this thread who claim they can hear sounds that do not even  exist, there is ABSOLUTELY no technical proof of even a hint that analog is better....

rbstehno
1,493 posts
 
Usually people into digital go cheap with analog and vice versa. Check out Fremer’s comparisons between digital and his analog setup, usually a 5-digit dac vs his $250k analog. Valid comparison?
IMO, you have to spend many times more for a tt setup than a good CD player and dac. For $3000, you won’t get a good sounding tt setup if you include the tt, arm, cartridge, alignment tools, phono preamp, step up transformer, and all the cables. For $3k, you can go with a Music Hall tt, a decent cartridge, a phono preamp, and a couple good pairs of cables and this will sound OK, will it beat a $3k dac, not a chance.
My analog setup costs multiple times the cost of my dac, and playing a good MQA song, still sounds better than vinyl. Vinyl usually sounds as good or better (depending on recording) than redbook, where it starts getting more equal and digital starts sounding better is when playing hires/DSD/MQA songs. Just my opinion.
terry9
2,354 posts
 
Well @cakyol, there is the Fourier Theorem, which states that all you have to do is analyze by sine wave. Everything follows from a sine wave analysis.

Consider a sinewave. How many samples per wave are required to push distortion below 5%? When I did the analysis, I came up with 250. All you have to do now is divide sampling rate by 250 to find the highest frequency with adequate distortion figures.

But don’t trust my analysis. Do your own. There are lots of pro and semipro math packages out there. That’s the point of math and science - when someone gives the details of his analysis, it’s out there for disproof, and I would prefer to be corrected than persist in error.
milpai's avatar
milpai
2,427 posts
 
@chadsort,Please don't post such things on this forum.Just kidding. Enjoy your music, whichever way you prefer!
More to discover