Stan--trust me when I say that you won't embarrass me but it seems to me that in all of your posts you are giving the overall impression to the collective here that only you have the "golden ears" and that yours are the only ones to be trusted.I would beg to differ. It would be a pleasure to host you for some listening fun. After all isn't this what the hobby is all about? |
as my system includes both Oneobgyn's emmlabs gear and SOTA vinyl i do this comparison every day. if comparing very good (top 30% of 6000 lps) vinyl (of the same recording) to the very best digital (redbook or SACD) the vinyl is at a higher level of musical performance. weekly i have various audio friends over for this comparison. the result is ALWAYS the same. the system is full range; the room is good; the associated gear is all competent. another thing. as my system has improved over this last year the gap between vinyl and digital has increased. digital has a relative performance ceiling since resolution is limited; vinyl continues to reveal more and more as the system gets more out of the way. anyone who needs convincing; just show up any Saturday afternoon about 4:00pm (Alex, come on up!....bring your new toy). that said; the digital performance is staggeringly good and fully satisfying. i completely understand how one might feel that the top digital performance that they are hearing must be equal or better than where they feel vinyl is. all can say to those sensible people is......until you hear them side by side (as i do for about 4 hours daily)......you won't believe. |
Mike, I have no problem believing that your SODA may often appear to exceed the performance of the EMM. Unfortunately your generalization from this statement that analog is inherently superior to digital is invalid. Similarly, if you had said that your EMM were better than your SODA, and thus concluded that digital were inherently superior to analog, that to would constitute an invalid induction. I am afraid that the entire broad argument of analog/vs digital superiority or viceversa is inherently specious and I am quite sure even old Ludwig Wittgenstein would find it problematic on purely logical or epistemological grounds. |
Guido; "I am quite sure even old Ludwig Wittgenstein would find it problematic on purely logical or epistemological grounds." if you're going to kick my ass please speak English. :^) but seriously......my comments about my SODA (i assume you mean SOTA--state of the art) vinyl setup performance being musically superior to digital is my perspective......my opinion......my feelings. to be more specific; the emmlabs represents an acknowledged reference of the best digital performance. not to say there are not others; but for sure the emmlabs is in that very top level of digital performance. if then, my vinyl setup consistently delivers a more satisfying musical performance then it is completely valid for me to say that. yes, i am specifically saying that at the very top of both formats vinyl is superior in reproducing music according to my and 100% of many others musical judgements visiting my room (25-30 listeners) in the recent months. if we are judgeing the performance potential of two formats; and at least one setup represents the best of that format; and the other format is judged consistently better......then it is valid logically to say that one format is musically better. that is not the whole story; but it is not invalid. now, this is only a subjective opinion shared by myself and other visitors to my room. and for sure; YMMV. certainly, there may be some/many that may not reach the same conclusion......which wouldn't invalidate their perspectives. to call my perspective 'invalid' is quite pompous and unsupportable. this is not science but art which we are judging; which calls for subjective opinions; not scientific method. have a nice day. |
Guidocorona, I looked here: Epistemological stereo I see his opinions about life, religion and such, but cannot find a listing of his stereo system. Do you really believe this guy is a better expert on sound than Mike Lavigne? He died in 1951, so I have my suspicions, Mike still listens, every day. |
