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
Post removed 
tomic601's avatar
tomic601
12,928 posts
 
Some of us record original acoustic events in very high quality in both analog and digital formats and can appreciate the relative strengths and weaknesses in both formats. There are engineers and music makers working in both formats.

for those trapped in 1986 with at best a mediocre CD player, you might bulk up your chops and experience with a visit to modern digital. Bit perfect rips off a server or downloaded files played thru a quality DAC might surprise ya...

but only IF you have an open mind....  And ears and maybe listen...

and of course, I have 3 lovely TT and all the stuff to go along....
big_greg
6,647 posts
 
I'm listening to a digital playlist tonight.  A number of the songs so far have sounded magical. Last night I listened to a white label promo copy of the Grateful Dead's Terrapin Station. That sounded magical. I think it has a lot more to do with the quality of the recording than the media it's on once you get to a certain point. I enjoy listening to both, why fight over which one is better?
tomic601's avatar
tomic601
12,928 posts
 
IF we live thru this and you find yourself in Seattle or Carlsbad, CA stop by for a listen. Analog and Digital both places. 
IF you have a decent DAC make you you check out the downloads bench at 2L recordings, The Nordic Sound. Lots of superb music, hyper well recorded in a variety of formats. It’s a listening skill sharpener for sure. Grammy winning, how very elitist I know...
gdnrbob
4,449 posts
 
@tomic601 ,
I for one, hope to take you up on you offer.
Seattle and Carlsburg are two places I have never been to before.
Bob
More to discover