When is digital going to get the soul of music?

interesting thread...gets a little personal..so would everybody please put down their gun..

in review of digital, i would have to agree that analog is easy to listen to and 'get lost' in the music very quickly...

however, given the need to have a decent digital rig is absolutely needed when you want to listen to something that is available on cd only. so going back and forth is when you notice the discrepencies.. but are you making a really fair comparison ?????

most analog owners will have a analog rig that is 5x-10x the cost of their digital rig.. so is that really a fair comparison ?

think of the years you have listen to bad digital because of a poorly isolated unit and stock power cord (cringing !!!!!!) there have been quantam leaps in digital playback over the last 6 years and in the very best digital units have rivalled analog- though at a much hugher cost...

the curren state of digital has been promising except fot the demise if sacd/dvd-a . Imo, WE ALL LOST ON THIS in regards to a high level recording format...

but for now, affordable digital is very, very, good and "in somes cases" it has equaled vinyl in overall terms in digital units costing $3k-$5k..

i am hoping by the next quantam leap we will be ewual footing or better yet higher gtound..

Tvad said, "I wonder if musicality blended with accuracy is a trademark of Sony DVD players in general, since I have noticed the same qualities in Modwright Sony 999ES and Sony 9000ES players."

Perhaps. Although the TRL/Sony 900 seems to be an entirely different beast altogether. I have yet to hear any player that is as musical, yet accurate.

There are, however, apparent differences in how and what we hear ... which is cool, we don't all like/prefer the same sound. There are folks that prefer SET tubes and horns over solid state or Push-pull tubes and cones or 'stats. and I'm sure that certain players integrate better into some systems than others.

My point, we are all different. I will point out that the TRL/Sony 900 is an excellent example of the TRL house sound which has its following, too, as noted when I stopped by the TRL shop last Wednesday. I saw 15 Sony 900's in various stages of modification. This did not count the 5 or 6 that shipped out last week, according to their "white boards". These all came in as a result of folks hearing Brian Kyle's TRL/Sony 900 in the VMPS/Bruce Moore/Xtreme Cables room at THE Show.

I'm sure that the other modifiers have noted the same success after showing their wares at THE Show and CES.

We all have different tastes.

My vote for the most soulfull, emotionally involving player goes to the TRL/Sony 900.

Best,

Jack

Jeez (TRL) Jack (TRL), if (TRL) you (TRL) were (TRL) any (TRL) less (TRL) subtle (TRL), we'd (TRL) miss (TRL) your (TRL) point (TRL) entirely (TRL).

:-)))))))))))))))))))))))

I've found digital recordings via Lp to be a revelation. Still not as good as the best analog, but much warmer and imaging and soundstage and textural complexity are much better than any CD or SACD player I've ever owned. Textural differentiation in the bass, (such as being able to hear low harp and timpani as two distinct sounds), are much better on digital Lps as well. It may no be the digital recording that caused all the mess, it may be the disc itself.

Boa2: Subtlety wasn't the issue ... showing that we are all different with different tastes was.

Perhaps you missed this paragraph:

"There are, however, apparent differences in how and what we hear ... which is cool, we don't all like/prefer the same sound. There are folks that prefer SET tubes and horns over solid state or Push-pull tubes and cones or 'stats. and I'm sure that certain players integrate better into some systems than others."

I'm certain that your Wife hears differently than you do, too.

Best wishes,

Jack :)