2. digital
  3. 179612-142872

Its not vinyl

I have read 100’s of discussions on the subject of building a streaming digital option for audiophile systems. Everything from the internet connection to the streaming source and then the dac. In my reading through the posts the argument will quickly turn to its not analog, vinyl is better, on the anti streaming side and then on the pro streaming side posters will fed the argument with its almost as good as my phono stage, sounds better than analog. This will even hold true within the dac manufactures and dac owners who will refer to their dac sound as analog sounding or just like phono. I think this is most referenced in the R2R dac category. I started a discussion on the new Gustard R26 which is a discrete R2R ladder dac. Right away I was confronted with “why do you want to spend the money to replace your phono analog end that you already have and sounds great”?  I  Replied with the usual “phono does sound better, even a $30,000 dac will never beat analog and all the other analog vs digital talking points”. Then it hit me that we have been arguing this wrong all this time. The argument should be that the quest in putting together a top notch streaming digital setup is not a quest to beat analog or beat phono. The quest and objective is to achieve a “ less digital sound”. We all know that sharp, bright  razor blades in my bleeding ears sterile digital sound, that will bring in-listener fatigue and quickly want you turning off the music. What I am reiterating here is that the quest the cost and the journey in digital is not to beat analog it is to beat “digital”.

sgreg1
jasonbourne52's avatar
jasonbourne52
2,863 posts
 

Tell me a lot isn't lost from a master tape when a master lacquer is cut using a cutter head/stylus/amplifier. Then plating the master lacquer to yield the mothers and thence the stampers. The stampers in use have a limited life. This is how LPs have been made since their invention in 1948 at CBS Labs. 

mlsstl
1,438 posts
 

From a slightly different viewpoint, in most of the LP v. Digital comparisons one reads, they are comparing a commercial LP against the CD version, or perhaps a download or stream.  Particularly with classic rock material, the two releases are often decades apart and few have any clue as to what differences there were in mixing and mastering.

My view is based on my own conversion of hundreds of LPs in my personal collection to digital over a ten or more year period.  That meant I knew exactly where the digital file came from. My experience is that those digital conversions sounded just like the vinyl. As others noted above, the process of making LPs involves a LOT of mechanical steps, each adding its own flavor.  I've also been lucky to hear some open reel tapes over the years direct from recording studios, and they have a flavor that is different than the LPs made from them.  When I converted a few of these open reel that were direct copies from the studio tape, I again found that the digital copy captured the tape's qualities.

In my mind, most of the complaints I hear about digital have more to do with the intentional choices made in the production of the CD or digital file than any inherent incapability of the digital format itself.

jond's avatar
jond
5,846 posts
 

I think that if you are using both streaming and vinyl as sources it’s not that one needs to sound better than, or as good as, the other. Both just  need to sound good enough so that you listen to them both.

mazian's avatar
mazian
406 posts
 

@jasonbourne52  +1

ghdprentice
7,046 posts
 

@jond 

 

+1… which for me is virtually the same. Digital came up short for 38 of the last 40 years for me.

More to discover