2. digital
  3. 159433-10803

A case for Hi Rez Digital

Ok...walk with me (BTW I listen to both analog and digital)

You have a Master tape from a classic album that is considered "audiophile". You get the best mastering engineer. Best converters, etc. Tape in great shape. The Engineer is well experienced in both digital and analog mastering.

1. The Engineer masters a Hi Rez 24 bit (96 or 192) file. Which is either distributed digitally (HD Tracks, etc) or SACD (24/44?). No 16/44 version...just High Rez. The consumer purchases and plays thru a high quality DAC and stereo system. 

2. Same Engineer masters a vinyl version. The normal process (Laquer---plates---stampers or whatever the process) for an audiophile LP (think MoFi, MM, etc). Goes to pressing plant and uses the highest quality vinyl. The vinyl is packaged in a cover, shrink-wrapped and shipped to warehouse, record store, etc. The buyer gets the album and has a similar high quality system as the digital buyer. Just instead of a DAC...the buyer has a phono pre, Turntable, and cartridge.


Shouldn't the digital buyer get the closest version to the source master tape and thus have the best sounding version?No surface noise, fewer variations (Dacs can vary, however, with LPs you have a TT, Cartridge, more interconnects thruout, plus variations in the vinyl itself. How about cutting head wear).

Myself, numerous LPs that sound better than digital. I have a huge collection of Hi-Rez and DSD files. I have many Hi Rez versions better sounding than audiophile Lps. I'm inclined to think that the majority of sound quality (I know there are human preferences) comes from the recording and mastering vs format. And all things equal, Digital edges out LPs for noise alone. 


Thoughts?






aberyclark
millercarbon's avatar
millercarbon
12,531 posts
 
The buyer gets the album and has a similar high quality system as the digital buyer. Just instead of a DAC...the buyer has a phono pre, Turntable, and cartridge.

Just one problem: there is no such thing as a digital anything that is similar to a record.

From the day I first dug out my old Technics and heard it blow away my five times the cost CDP, to the dozens of times I’ve played CD and records for people, never once has anyone said oh my God I never knew CD sounded so good! 

Guess what they say instead.   You know the answer. Know it in your bones.

Its not just a river in Egypt.

There’s a reason the highest aspiration, compliment, and goal of digital is to sound like analog: it just sounds better.

But you guys are having such fun. Party on! Perfect sound forever!
dave_b's avatar
dave_b
3,159 posts
 
Millercarbon...I have both and grew up with vinyl.  I have many digital versions of music that definitely sound better than the vinyl copy.  Caveat being, the digital front end must be fairly high quality and properly cabled, fed and matched!
roberjerman
4,319 posts
 
+1 millercarbon!
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,308 posts
 
So a 100 year old format somewhat adjusted 70 years ago and now almost exclusively mastered from digital sources is still the gold standard for sound? 

That’s pretty funny. 

The packaging has Always been superior to CD and Has even improved in recent years so it does have that going for it.
aberyclark OP
1,355 posts
 
I'll be honest. I think lots have to do with the whole vinyl experience. The sleeve, the cleaning, the TT set up, etc. Much like a collector of vintage anything. Much of the newer vinyl lovers are buying the $99 AT Turntables that are a plenty at record stores. Its more about the "experience". Just my two cents. I love the experience myself.....but I'm also totally honest with myself.
More to discover