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
inna
7,251 posts
 
To begin with, put your Esoteric player aside, forget about it. It is clear that your analog rig does not sound as good as it can and should. It should sound very very good. Make it happen. After that you might want to compare using original pressing record or in some cases Japanese first release pressing from seventies and best cd issue of the same album you can find, usually Japanese audiophile.
Many right things have already been said.
Yes, tape rules, just not cassette. To date I have never heard "stunning" digital recording. Or analog for that matter. My analog rig is better than my cd player so my comparison is there is no comparison, no use to you.
lastperfectdaymusic's avatar
lastperfectdaymusic
48 posts
 
Judging by the majority of replies on this thread there seems to be overwhelming concensus that analogue can still hold its own and more often than not surpasses digital in the reproduction of recorded music. However as one post suggests, therein lies a complex challenge of making sure that each of the many components involved in the analogue chain are well set up and working together. The best option you have been in the digital habit and wish to try analogue is to get one of the better quality packages that include the fully set up record player. Most reviews consider even these starter level systems to be better than any digital player.
wolf_garcia
6,639 posts
 
I've found that a turntable is the only thing that will play my vinyl collection...you can't cram them into a CD player slot...really nothing else works. 
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
9,510 posts
 

And wolf, our turntables can play CD's ;-) . For those of us with considerable music libraries in both formats, it's not an either/or proposition; you gotta have both. For those just starting out, there is, as many have said here, a learning curve involved with LP's and table/arm/cartridges, and it takes some time and effort to become proficient at it.

@chadsort, are you up to/for it? You will need to learn about different pressings of the same album, each having it's own sound quality. Old timers consider that part of their appeal; do you? Do you dread cleaning an LP, and a stylus? Are you willing and able to invest in superior isolation for your table? All this, and much more (accurate set-up, adjustment, maintenance, etc.) comes with the territory.

orpheus10
8,668 posts
 

Ain't no way a starter level record player, can even beat cheap digital; or why else would millions of people chuck their mid fi turntables, and sell or give away records?
More to discover