Pros and Cons of "Staying with" Analog and Vinyl


After having various turntables over the last 40 years, I am seriously considering getting out of analog. The "vinylists" argue that analog playback sounds more natural, musical, and provides more of an emotional response. I have experienced this feeling several times while listening to my modest vinyl collection, and tend to agree....until I begin hearing pops, clicks, surface noise. I keep my vinyl generally clean and protected

However, after listening to the 40th anniversay edition of Jethro Tull's "Aqualung" I am more convinced that analog is just not worth the time, money and, maintenance. The dynamics on new Aqualung are superb and there seems to be much more detail to what I remember of the Mobile Fidelity remastered recording

I have a modest analog set-up Rega P3-24 with their upgraded PS and the Dynavector 10X5 MC. I was on the verge of upgrading to the new Rega RP-6 which includes a newly design PS, and a choice of color plinths. Even with a generous trade-in value offered by the dealer, I would still be putting in about $1300 + which would get me into the Dynavector DV 20MKII ( above their 10X5.)

I personally don't see the value regardless of the sonic qualitative edge of analog. Maybe, the money could be spent elsewhere or not at all. BTW, I am not getting into computer audio, and am STILL not convinced that a BASIC DAC will bring me closer to analog sound quality. Members have recommended Peachtree's DACIT, and even the supposedly new and improved Musical Fidelity V-DAC II. I have a Rega Apollo player. A great sounding player, but it has its flaws.

Therefore, I would like to hear the pros and cons of staying with analog....or just dumping it. Thanks
sunnyjim
And to speak to your value analysis, it's a fascinating point. I went from a Maplenoll Ariadne Signature/Sony XA-20ES CD player to a Thorens 2030/Primare CD21. Same Grado Reference Sonata cartridge for both.

The Thorens is more than 95% of the Maplenoll, so the sound quality of analog hasn't taken a significant step back for me. But the quality of CD playback has improved significantly from when I was last shopping. So retail for that Primare is about $1500. Retail for the 2030 (thank the heavens for sales!) approaches $4k with the Rega 300 arm.

If you spend identical sums on analog and digital, what kind of results would you get? Good question. But only you can answer what analog is worth to you, fiscally.

This doesn't even get into computer audio, which is the next great audio frontier, a medium that is growing by leaps and bounds.

But it sounds like you've made your mind up. I'm down to about 1,000 LPs after giving away a couple hundred or so, and can't see anything making me give those up.

Also know that digital isn't really about "analog sound quality." Digital is, as others have noted, more accurate than analog. But whether it's the added "air" created by that sound of stylus contacting groove or what, I can still play the same disc on CD and vinyl for anyone in my listening room, and they will invariably prefer the vinyl.

Weird, that subjective preference. Digital isn't supposed to sound like analog. It's like when people ask about solid-state amps that "sound" like tube amps, when the ideal amp won't have a "sound," be it tube or solid state. Likewise with digital vs analog. A great recording will be great, no matter the format, irrespective of sonic artifacts.

It's your ears, and your money. Do what you want with it.
I want to thank everyone who responded, especially those who dedicated the extra time and paragraphs to the thread. Every response provided me with perspective as to how to proceed

LET ME CLARIFY, that noise in itself does not bother me as much AS WHAT IT INDICATES".... which says you should have taken better care of the records, or need to clean the vinyl with a higher quality liquid and/or a record cleaning machine. I did to a degree: VPI record sleeves, the cheapo Audio Advisor record cleaner (for awhile), and a few spray and clean concoctions. The collection totals about 60LP's, I have a few classical LP's that date from 1976 given to me as a gift by co-workers. The Deutsh-Gramophone LP of E. Power Biggs, playing Bach is excellent on every level and without noise

I have some LP's that were sourced at the local record hut, and were in fair condition when I acquired them. I now replace noisy or worn LP's with their (hopefully) remastered equivalent, and some with Japanese pressings which overall are very good, but not astounding.

The remastered disc version of Hall and Oats "Silver Album" is excellent, and not bright or edgy as some tracks on the original LP. Whereas, the LP of the Byrd's "Mr Tamborine Man" is untouchable in the emotion it conveys despite its pops and clicks. As I mentioned in the body of the thread, I recently played the new 40th anniversary edition CD of the Tull's "Aqualung".... and, yes it is missing something of the emotional guts of the Mobile Fidelity vinyl LP, but the dynamics, punch, power, and clarity of the disc is astounding.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!!!! JIM.
Rok, baby. If you really listen to music first and foremost and not to what your system is doing, then you should learn to appreciate vinyl. First of all, as Doug and some others have said, the experience does not have to be as tedious and "noisy" (ticks and pops) as you seem to think. That's all I can say.
For people that primarily listen to pre 1990 music, it makes sense to stay with vinyl. No doubt that the engineers back then and in the early days of CD new how to master for vinyl and not CD. Since the mid 1990's, the recording studios figured it out and CDs are typically very well mastered. To each his own, for me I burned out on the music from the 70's and 80's a long long time ago. I buy lots of new music and I buy only CDs. And for the vast majority of my purchases, the sound quality is better than a 30 year old vinyl recording. Much better. And once I burn it, it will last forever.