Has anyone been able to define well or measure differences between vinyl and digital?

thespeakerdude

Can we agree that if there is a difference between CD quality done right and high resolution that the difference is very small, and hard or very hard to detect?

This is a tricky question because "very small" is subjective and the extent to which differences are audible vary depending on the content. I have a digital recorder that can do 24/96, and the difference between that and 16/44.1 can be noticeable. A lot depends on what you're recording.

The difference between vinyl and CD is bigger, much bigger than CD and high res.

I'm not sure I agree. I know it annoys some of my fellow analogphiles when I say that the very best LP playback and the best CD playback sound very, very close. But that can't happen without a lot of effort and expense on the LP side.

Every vinyl versus digital argument seems to devolve into an attempt to find some mysterious flaw with digital that cannot be supported with math, engineering, nor experiment.

I explained previously in this thread that the math behind digital audio - Fourier Transform and Shannon/Nyquist - is perfect and can be proven using math. Digital's flaws are elsewhere.

The differences between CD and vinyl are not small.

If we're talking high-end LP playback, the differences are much smaller than many believe. Many people are stunned when they hear first class LP playback for the first time.

@cleeds ,

I did not mean you with respect to "digital confusion".

I do think vinyl done well, excellent pressing (clean), good turntable, good cartridge, all properly setup sounds very good. I don't think you need to spend $50K either. $10K maybe. I also think if you listen to that side by side with CD, you will always be able to differentiate them, even if its the slightest tick. Anytime I have been in situations where they are compared side by side, they are always different. I won't claim the level matching was perfect. If the vinyl frequency response was not flat, I am not sure that is possible.

I am open to it being just mastering, mastering and cross-talk, maybe my FR is not as flat as I think it is, etc. 

I think my only point, at this point, is that for people who have a vinyl preference, there are simple and probably obvious reasons we could find if we looked closely at their system or the music they listen to.  You say you are an analog guy, but you have not commented on your preference or thoughts about why?

thespeakerdude

I do think vinyl done well, excellent pressing (clean), good turntable, good cartridge, all properly setup sounds very good. I don't think you need to spend $50K either. $10K maybe.

If you're talking about new prices, I don't think $10K can get you there. And you'll probably need to spend more than that for a phono stage. But I absolutely agree about the importance of a clean record - that makes all the difference in the world and is the reason I use an easy "one button" ultrasonic LP cleaning system.

I also think if you listen to that side by side with CD, you will always be able to differentiate them, even if its the slightest tick.

Probably true.

I don’t think $10K can get you there

nothing will, for some

Some references I found informative.

Level I

Popular level. Summarizes pros and cons, remaining in old paradigm, e.g. in regard to dynamic range estimation.

Level II

Somewhat technical level. Parts 1-5 provide good overview of LP technology. Parts 6-9 describe distortions inherent in it.  

Level III

Very technical level. This explains why, despite obviously inherently high level of distortions, LPs sound just fine to many people. Executive summary: this is because LP distortions are mostly of "right" kind, which human hearing system do not register with the same intensity as "wrong" distortions.

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_I.pdf

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_II.pdf