When does analog compete with digital?


With vinyl becoming all the rage, many believe (perhaps mistakenly) that a budget of $1K will allow them to bring their analog front end up to par with their digital. I would like a reasoned assessment of this issue.

How much time, money, and expertise do you think is necessary before one can seriously claim that their analog front end can compete with their digital? What characteristics, if any, are simply incommensurable between these two mediums? Let's use my system as an example.

Personally, I tried to build an analog front-end that focused on texture/warmth (as opposed to dynamics), but I still feel as though something is missing. Trouble is, I can't quite put my finger on it. I'd be grateful for comments/suggestions (system in sig)
jferreir
Jferreir,

I suggest you move the left speaker out of the corner and both speakers away from refractive edges of the desk. It will cost you nothing and will make a huge improvement in imaging and sound.
My apologies for not reading ALL the responses, (lots of them!), but I started back into vinyl with a budget table, cart, and phonostage, thinking that would do just to get a chance to hear more music relatively cheaply. It didn't quite work out that way. I just wasn't satisfied with the fit and finish if the budget table, or the sound for that matter.

Now, $6190 and four years later, my analog finally outdoes digital by a wide margin, on the right recording. I tried to go against my audiophile nature, and settle for less than I normally would in the analog format.

I bought most of my gear (including the Dyna XX2MKII cart with almost no hours on it) used, in great shape here on Audiogon or the figure quoted above would be at least a third higher.

What was I thinking? I'm glad I did it, it suits my hands-on approach to audio. If I had it to do over, I would still do it, but I would learn how to extract the best out of any given group of components before deciding to move onward (and upward in price). If you don't really know how to set up your arm/cartidge, you have no idea how good, or bad, what you have is. It's taken me years to learn the intricacies and variables of set up, and some timely help and advice from such as Dave Garrettson and Doug Deacon, but I finally made it. The knowledge is the most valuable part of the whole system, as without it, you just keep wondering why it doesn't sound as good as you thought it should. But with determination, (it also helps a great deal if you enjoy the process), success can be achieved.

As Elizabeth said, they are different, but analog can and does sound better, when things are optimized (I think there is just more THERE there with analog). I love both formats, but really get a bit more out of analog.

Dan
It took me getting a Rega P5 / Michell Techno weight / Groovetracer Reference Subplatter / 2mm spacer / Dynavector 20XL / Rogue Stealth Phono Pre to finally get to where I was happy with vinyl when comparing to CD's. They do sound different and a lot comes down to the source signal. I would say about $2-$3K before it started competing with the sound of CDs.

2 cents.
Theron
Darn sorry to hear that. I apologize that my pathetic $60 Empire cartridge and my tubed phono pre-amp kicks sand in the face of ANY cd I've ever heard. Perhaps I just don't understand the concept of the silhouette cutouts that cd offers that I've listened to for thirty years. It doesn't take a lot of energy or expense to have vinyl sound like music, only an open mind.

Sincerely,
Digital is superior for 1 reason: Remote

The lack of remote allows me to focus on the music currently playing, rather than thinking about which track to jump to next. However, if I could train my 5-year-old to flip sides, brush the record, clean the stylus, and queue up the first track, I'd be on to something. I'd trust her over my 8-year-old son (but probably be the logical choice to train, as he'd be sitting next to me, listening).