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
glupson
7,842 posts
 
By the way, I just copied that Famous Blue Raincoat record I had mentioned earlier into digital format (DSD 2.8). If there is a difference, it is not that is negligible. It is that it really does not matter. It is very very small, at best, and that is me giving it benefit of the doubt. So, it is a digital recording from last century, pressed on vinyl, played on a less-than-truly-audiophile analog equipment, and then transferred to decent digital format via the cheapest machine I could find. I have no idea what it all means except that digital is more convenient in the long run. Good news: There will be no more news about Famous Blue Raincoat.
prof
3,535 posts
 

glupson,

What it means, I suspect (and from what I've read, and though many may protest) is simply that the vinyl sound can be captured by digital.  Which makes sense to me.

I don't do needle drop recordings for various reasons.  My system isn't set up for it.  But I have no desire.  If I'm listening to vinyl, I want the whole experience.  I also have left over mental aversions to digitizing my analog front end signal....those audiophile genes kicking in.  I just like the division between fully analog and digital sources.  If I sent everything through a digital converter it could actually make my life easier as it opens everything up to using digital room correction (though, frankly as my system stands I don't hear a need).   Though this aversion to digitizing my vinyl signal raised it's head when I bought some subwoofers (not yet integrated).  The subs don't have their own room correction and I will be splitting the signal between the mains and the subs.  I know room correction can come in really handy for subs and that would entail digitizing at least the signal from the analog front end to the subwoofers.  This would at least keep the signal fully analog to the main speakers, so I think I can wrap my head around that.   Damned audiophile genes!




glupson
7,842 posts
 
prof,

Your inclination to keep things "proper and pure" is understandable. In theory, I am that way. In practice, some records I would have liked to listen to again (after a decades-long hiatus) had to be digitized regardless of the audiophile-approved result. Cars, Walkman for planes, and all that. None of which is audiophile environment, but I cannot change it. The semi-perfectionist worm inside made me go for DSD but that is the only concession.

Which all reminds me that, once upon a time, there were record players for cars. And now we babble about minutia of the records meant to be played in them. We should ask kids who had dates in those cars listening to those records how they are really supposed to sound. I bet they were as low-fi as they could get and as exciting as anything we have these days, or more.
orpheus10
8,668 posts
 

Glupson, they had 45 RPM record players that were installed in the glove compartment, and there was nothing "lo fi" about them; my lady friend had one in her 66 Electra 225, and if you hit a big bump, it would let out a reverberating "ping"; I enjoyed it immensely.
glupson
7,842 posts
 
orpheus10,

That is what I meant. It must have been wonderful, the best sound ever. I still suspect that today, compared to current players and all these debates about wires, fuses, blacker blacks, wider soundstages, and what not, they would be considered imperfect. However, emotional impact must have been beyond belief. I have never heard one.
More to discover