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

This is an awesome discussion. Much appreciated.

@mikelavigne: in your opinion is there value today in SACD versus the highest quality digital streams from Tidal or Qobuz? If so, do you expect that to be the case in a couple of years? I hope this is not a stupid question. I am asking because I am contemplating getting an SACD player if there is an improvement to be had in sound quality over digital streaming for my 10-30% of time I’d be willing to listen to it over streaming. For point of reference, I have an all-digital system with total msrp in the low $20k’s (speakers, amps, source, cables included), if that impacts the answer. Thanks!

kren0006

@mikelavigne: in your opinion is there value today in SACD versus the highest quality digital streams ...  I am asking because I am contemplating getting an SACD player if there is an improvement to be had in sound quality over digital streaming ...

With all due respect to Mike, that's a decision I think can best be made by you. Why not borrow a player from your dealer and arrive at your own conclusion?

roberttdid,

You're right, it was more of an anecdotal impression of the various formats from Steve Hoffman than any clearly defined conclusion. Still interesting in itself.

I tend to respect his work because he claims his mission is to restore rather remix historic recordings, rather like an art restorer approaching period masterpieces.

Anyway, damn it! It seems as if DSD is no better than PCM, especially when it's not DSD all the way, which it hardly ever is.

On the other hand, it could equally be argued that in practice PCM is just as good as DSD but that's not what most of us were hoping for is it?

According to the Ben Zwickel's Mojo Audio article (linked below) it's still the recording that counts the most.

Just as it ever was.

As for the odd one out between tape, digital and vinyl, it's not tape, and it's not digital, so...

https://www.mojo-audio.com/blog/dsd-vs-pcm-myth-vs-truth/#:~:text=DSD%20recordings%20are%20commercia....

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.