Article: "Spin Me Round: Why Vinyl is Better Than Digital"

Wuwolf, all roads lead to Rome.

Most audiophiles do not understand the power of digital processing. You can actually make digital files sound like analog with a little monkeying around. I can make my media room sound like a huge arena or a smaller theater. I can bypass the digital processing with the press of a button. Nobody has ever preferred the system on bypass. I digitize a tube phono stage to take advantage of digital processing. If I take an analog signal and digitize it to 24/192 then bring it back to analog nobody has ever been able to tell the difference on Grado headphones. Michael Fremer also states that analog to 24/192 "is invisible." He routinely records samples to his computer for comparison using the same program I use, Pure Vinyl.
IMHO digital processing will make any system sound better, most of them a lot better. Digital files in this context can easily sound better than vinyl given the right mastering. I am a record collector saying this. 
If like chakster you enjoy collecting records but not files that is a respectable personal choice. Arguing about the superiority of one vs the other is rather pointless. There is no accounting for personal taste.  

Arguing about the superiority of one vs the other is rather pointless. There is no accounting for personal taste.

You are right about your first affirmation. But timbre natural perception is not a "taste" it is the result of a training musician learning experience, but there is no "taste" related to the natural perception of a stradivarius timbre and a cheap violin... Prefering one to the other dont reveal taste, but the presence of experience or the lack of experience...

The evaluation of any format performance at the end has nothing to do with "taste".....

And no digital processing can solve ALL the mechanical, electrical and acoustical problems in an audio system... A tool is a tool, not the solution by itself....

Mahgister has used the word timbre in 50 posts since Dec. 30. Time to find a new hammer.

i really apologize to disturb you another time, but why dont you stick to logical sound argument?

You  know perfectly well now why i used the complex concept of timbre ...

I could say that you hammered  the word digital accuracy 50 times... I prefer to stick to argument...

wuwulf10 posts01-15-2021 3:48am01-15-2021 9:37amDear audio2design,
but one more thing I believe is rather curios. If digital is defenitely superior, why than there are so many different solutions? Like using a chip form a manufacturer versus programming your own chip. NOS versus DAC with Filter. PCM versus DSD. Upsampling vs No Upsampling etc. Sometimes I feel the dissonance beween different digital opponents is bigger even than in analog where you have the dd versus rim versus belt discussions.This uncertainty about how to process digital best does not neccessarilymean that digital is inferior. What it shows to me is: solutions in digital or analog are easier to build than to be explained :-)

Sonic differences between what I will call technically equivalent DSD and PCM virtually all come down to implementation details.

Other than that, most of what you are mentioning is either implementation detail and/or an intentional euphonic manipulations and moving away from accuracy. I am not at all against that if you like the outcome.

NOS DACs at redbook rates are not technically accurate. The are fraught with both audible band artifacts and near audible band that can subharmonically isolate.  You can put a brick wall analog filter, but then you have other issues.


Upsampling a NOS DAC with a standalone upsampler will fix most of the ills of a NOS DAC. However, if you prefer one sound for one genre and a different sound for another genre, it makes total sense.

Every chip DAC designed in the last 20 years, and most high end standalone DACs where the DAC is discreet upsample. Sometimes they upsample a lot.  In most cases that is very good thing.  It makes analog filters simple and easy, and improves SNR in the audible band.  It's not going to overcome bad design.  There are some DAC chips that measure better at lower sample rates, but not so much modern ones.

Modern DACs also have different filter setting. Most of these "new" filter settings are technically less accurate. Some prefer the sound.

Other implementation details come into play like how well they reject noise on data / electrical connections, and how well they reject jitter on optical/co-ax connection.  A virtually jitter free isolated USB interface is not rocket science.