Analog vs. digital

Vinyl CAN sound superior to anything digital but you'll have to spend a lot more to get to that level.  Then, a 180 gm record is about 3 or 4 times the price of one month of Qobuz.  

I have both excellent sacd player and transport dac combo, when I play sacd disc , I felt why did even invest good amount of money on analog? But when I played my analog set up, that’s when I feel there is a good reason why I like analog. I both like the format, but if have time to seat , I listen to my vynil.

let's get real.

For reference, I have a highly resolving system by almost any standard, but am also a design engineering working (as a side gig, and creative outlet) int he field both with branded and contract designs.

Digital  systems, so long as they have no major flaws, will have far more details than ANY analog system.   IN THEORY.  96 dB signal to noise means the smallest signal can be 1/60,000th the size of the loudest.  That defines the level of detail before noise overwhelms it.  Even in a great turntable/vinyl,the noise floor will be 70 dB at best, which is ~ 1/3,000th. No i did not miss a zero or decimal point.

Before you start throwing stones at the egghead engineer who doesn't listen, i know full well and realize that there are lots of things in analog that sound better if and only if the system is good enough.  But make no mistake - you are heading mostly the failings of the digital mastering process, or of some cheap-ass DAC, or, very often you are sadly hearing the results of a recording deliberately made bright and shrill to overcome heading loss (Pete Towshend was famous for this) or the failings of tape and other elements in the recording and playback chain - AM radios int he early days, boom boxes int eh 60s.  There are some fascinating your tube videos with recording engineers about artists over-ruling good engineering advice for more ""pop" and "presence".

Then there are the euphonic vs dissonant distortions. Many analog distortions are hamonically related and sound warm.  Case #1: tubes. Most digital failings are harmonically unrelated (read up your music theory folks) and sound like crap.

So we have tow sets of sonic issues here that can easily become confused as wel listen.  Is that material the record misses?  Or a distortion? Or valid material from a really messed up recording from some old hearing-impaired rocker? or something else.

I suggest hearing digital from a great, old analog recording, well mastered (interestingly, most will be red book, not HD) such as the old verve, blue note or Mercury stuff. Play it on a very good DAC, with a well isolated USB source.  That will lack analog euphinics but will be far more detailed, tighter bass, blah, blah. I didn't say you will always LIKE it better. My opinion: many DACs are amusical as are many systems.  I have a filter designed for my "it may hit the market some day" next gen product with a filter to fight this that i plan to call the "de-nastifier" :-)

Happy holiday to those here in the USA.

@itsjustme

I suggest hearing digital from a great, old analog recording, well mastered (interestingly, most will be red book, not HD) such as the old verve, blue note or Mercury stuff.

I have to say you nailed it with this observation. This has precisely been my listening experience. Many of the jazz labels from the 1950s-1960s if remastered with care and skill will sound natural and wonderful. So much sucess is dependent on the recording itself. For an example, Contemporary Records (Old school west coast jazz label) Prestige, Riverside etc. Just to mention a few to add to your list.

Their Redbook CDs sound absolutely beautiful and engaging via my CD transport and DAC pairing. I think some digital components chase the detail aspect too much and miss the forest (Naturalness) for the trees (over emphasized artificial detail)). But without question there are some very capable and well implemented digital components that will get the job done in an exceedingly musically -realistic accomplished manner.

Charles

Looking at your components, it’s not hard to see that the SQ may not be converging as between digital and analog as you may wish.

What you haven’t told us is which sounds more to you like real instruments in real space. After all, that's the real test.  I’m guessing from your various posts that you listen to unamplified music a lot.

I do find enough convergence in my own set-up that it is hard to choose for SQ. But the advantages on the digital side are undeniable.