When is digital going to get the soul of music?

Well said Albert! Thank God for Reference Recordings HRx! This is probably as good as a mortal can get. :-) I am in total disbelief listening to these converted to LPCM DVD-A on my NWO-M! Amazing!

I guess what is not realized on this thread is that the best analog is what the best sound comes from, and if you can get digital to sound close enough, you already have a winner. IMO, of course.

Best wishes,
Alex Peychev

Having good digital is important for anyone who wants to hear those artists that don't release on LP.

I wish there was a CD player that allowed me to listen without being constantly reminded of it's flaws.

That being said I have heard positive things about your players if you're the Alex Peychev that does all the digital work.

My friend Joe Harley who's behind the Blue Note Jazz Vinyl Reissues at Music Matters was also responsible for the JVC HRCD project. Joe and I have been friends for 30+ years, he has an incredible ear !

Joe told me that the best digital, sitting on the drive in the studio was enough to make analog guys like he and I appreciate what digital can do. He then explained that every time It’s moved or transferred, reclocked or down sampled it takes a huge hit.

I think there is a lot going on with digital clock speed, error rate and bit problems that really screw with the sound. Eventually this problem will be solved but I'm not going to wait.

When digital gets where it should be and for a price I can justify, I'll jump on board. I have digital right now but it's an Oppo.

Oppo is "OK" at best, but priced like a used interconnect here at Audiogon :^). So, the fact it has flaws is acceptable for price paid.

The problem is many players that cost $15K, 20K $45K and more beats the stuffings out of the Oppo but still gets creamed by my Studer and turntable. With that much invested in digital I'd be pissed.

Hope I live long enough for it to be fixed. I think the technology is there but like I've posted here at Audiogon a dozen times, as long as Apple is making hundreds of millions selling MP3, the guys capable of issuing (true) high resolution digital are not even looking.

Albertporter,

My system won't like any cable with more than a whisper of dielectric. :-)

My Audio Note with important diode change, and 47 Lab Flatfish feeding it will change your mind.

12-20-10: Muralman1
Albertporter,

My system won't like any cable with more than a whisper of dielectric. :-)

My Audio Note with important diode change, and 47 Lab Flatfish feeding it will change your mind.

That would be nice, wish we lived close enough to each other to listen together.

I heard one of the upper level Audio Note DACs some years ago at the home of one of the members of my audio group. I admit It was prettier than most of what's out there.

We got very different results with each transport and cable. I thought the best was with the CEC belt drive.

Alex, -- "takes a great deal of effort to approach analog quality with digital" -- yes, I agree, it is simply easier to get pleasant sound from a TT than frequently the typical at home CD setup. But that is not the fault of the CD medium itself, but IS the fault of the CD playback mechanism. Simply put, it is injecting too much unpleasant distortion directly into the signal, AND adversely affecting the following amplifier stages. Subtle distortion, yes, but very unpleasant.

So, again, I emphasise, it is at the actual moment that the digital recording is being played, running through the DAC when the damage is done. Let's consider those tests you did:

1) Vinyl to top line AKM ADC encoded at 192/24: Recording 24
1) Same vinyl to top line AKM ADC encoded at 44.1/16: Recording 16

Now, from my point of view, Recording 16 is effectively the same quality as Recording 24, assuming the AKM device is top line as you say.

Now let's play them back -- for argument's sake in a SACD player. Oh dear, Recording 24 is much better than Recording 16! You would say, just what I expected. But I would say, what's happening is that the mechanism in the SACD player is much better at its job of playing back Recording 24 than it is of Recording 16; in other words, at the point of playback more "nasty" distortion is being generated directly and indirectly by the SACD player when ACTUALLY PLAYING 44.1/16 material than when PLAYING 192/24 material, even if it is of the same original audio!

So, in simple terms, the CD sound is lousy because the CD playback is not working properly, or at least not as well as the SACD playback ...

Frank

Albertporter, I'm sorry, it appears at the moment that you're starting to come from the direction of "conspiracy" theories, and definitely we are too far apart in our thinking. Thanks for the input anyway and cheers ...

Frank