Is a vinyl rig only worth it for oldies?

Dear lacee: I love analog but I realy like digital too.

Now, one " thing " is the redbook where its limitation reside on those limited 16bits but a HR digital as DVDA has 24bits: this is not over or up sampling but REAL bits/music in the same way than analog, I repeat not over or up sampling. First than all we have to understand what means DVDA native non-limits.

In the other side the K series by Esoteric came with 32bits DACs and this is something to hear!!!

My point is still the same: to understand what happen down there during playback in either alternative and IMHO to say that analog LP are a superior medium is ( again ) IMHO an absolute misunderstood on the whole playback subject in a home audio system.

IMHO your posts, that I respect, are " wrong " right from start because what you are " speculating " is not what realy happen during LP playback or : Do you think that during LP playback what is in the recording is what you are listening in your system with out those severe and several degradation stages where the analog signal muist pass?

I can't to go on talking on the same if we can't understand what is really happening how the signal is heavely " touched " my the analog rig.

What you hear are all those LP playback distortions and not what is in the recording. Those playback added distortions never existed in the recording process. All what you are saying happen because those non-existen distortions I repeat: NON EXISTEN DISTORTIONS COLORATIONS DURIN THE RECORDING AND CERTAINLY NEVER IN A LIVE EVENT°!!!!!!!!

Got it?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

No, I don't "got it".

I don't hear the distortions you refer to in my vinyl rig nor in my friends vinyl rig.

I am not aware of added distortions that interfere with the music, or that add harmonious colourations pleasing to my ears and the ears of others who have listened to my system or his.

I have heard a lot of noisy distortions on lesser vinyl gear, perhaps this is what you are more familiar with.

What you don't get is the fact that the bar for the sampling rate has always been set too low.

I have listened to pure SACD on my Esoteric and my friends Scarlatti, and it does eclipse the sound of redbook cd.
No arguments there.

Some of his hi res computer music(Amarra software, Naim )and played thru the Scarlatti dac and clock sound better than his DSD from the pure SACD Japanese discs.
Some not all.A lot of the hi res is not Hi res, which has disappointed him.His Scarlatti reveals the true sampling rates.

What you fail to "get" is the fact that the recordings from the late 50's to early 60's were pure recordings compared to what is done today.

You can't get much purer than simple miking and perhaps just riding the gain and having all the musicians in the same room, playing together in real time and capturing the sound of the room and all the air and distortions in that room.
Those master analog tapes are nearer to the original event, the truth, than what is being done today with even the best digital recording machines.

The problem with the current generation of digtal recordings is the reliance on after the fact fixes to the original recording.And most likely, all the musicians weren't even at the recording at the same time.Their parts are "phoned" in or pasted on after the fact.Now add in all the effects and toys and the orignal sound isn't even close to being called the original sound.

Of course this is a black and white scenario of the most extreme examples of recording music.

One I feel is an art the other is a learned skill.

When these early all analog recordings are played back on very good vinyl systems,as opposed to just a turntable, cheap cartridge and inhouse phono stage in a receiver,you get all the black ,noise free background and silence between notes that the better digital systems gives you.And then somethingelse that digital doesn't.

This includes all the nasties you have pointed out in the vinyl chain.
Somehow the well recorded lp's played thru good vinyl systems despite all the distortions you attribute to them,do sound more faithfull to the original event.

At least to my ears,which have been exposed to live music( I'm a musician)for over forty years.

Let me close by saying that although I don't get what you are saying, I do "get it" when it comes to recognizing the superiority of quality vinyl systems when compared to even more expensive digital systems.Despite how perfect to the original the digital manufacturer claims may be.There's more going on between the recording mic and your ear in digital than there is in analog.At least in the classic analog recordings of the past 50 or 60 years.

Think about this.
Why are the best digital systems always touted as "analog like"? Because analog when done right still sets the standard,distortions and all.
Since we are talking about vinyl I would like to mention that reel to reel analog can be even closer to the live experience most of us are searching for.
And vinyl replay gear was always compared to how close they came to matching the standards set by analog reel to reel set ups.
And even those reel to reel set ups of yesterday and today have distortions.
Distortions are everywhere,except perhaps in your perfect digital world.
Sixty year old recordings are still regarded as the holy grail,yet those recordings were recorded on primitive electronics compared to what is available today.

Why are they still so revered?

If they were as flawed and distorted as you contend, they should have been long forgotten and out of print.Yet here they are, in 200 gram,45 rpm versions that can sound better than the original pressings in some cases.

Perhaps they don't sound any better in your system,so I can't debate that they should, I haven't heard your vinyl replay system. I can state that they do sound great in mine.How can you debate that?

You can only speculate,whereas I have heard direct comparisons of redbook,pure SACD, Hi Res computer, and high end vinyl sources in a very well put together system.
I can lay claim to having a first hand experience with comparing the two formats,and my friend who owns the system has come to the same conclusion as me.
He enjoys the realism that vinyl has that none of his superb digital sources provide.
In this case we both "get it".
You don't.

Dear Lacee: ++++ " I don't hear the distortions you refer to in my vinyl rig nor in my friends vinyl rig.

I am not aware of added distortions that interfere with the music, or that add harmonious colourations pleasing to my ears and the ears of others who have listened to my system or his.
" +++++

well if you and your friends can't hear all those added distortions developed through more than 20 playback different stages that contribute to the signal degradation then is useless to continue about because IMHO and with all respect or all of you are " deaf " or simple: you can't understand what happen in each of those different 20 stages in the anlog rig during playback .

+++++ " I have heard a lot of noisy distortions on lesser vinyl gear, perhaps this is what you are more familiar with. " ++++

could be. Btw, I'm " familiar " with each link in your analog rig ( including the Steelhead. ).

+++++ " Somehow the well recorded lp's played thru good vinyl systems despite all the distortions you attribute to them " +++++

I don't attribute nothing those are facts I'm not speculating or invented nothing: facts, only that.

+++++ " Why are the best digital systems always touted as "analog like"? " +++++

by ignorance.

+++++ " Distortions are everywhere,except perhaps in your perfect digital world. " +++++

I never say that, so don't put " words in my mouth ". I was very specific: both alternatives have its own TRADE-OFFS !!!

Lacee, for my part I think is enough and as I posted twice: I will go to enjoy both alternayives. Bye!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

The original recordings were done so well that those master tapes can still be used to make modern pressings that can be better than the originals.

They may be a bit expensive,but the same used original lp's are costing more,and by used I mean less than pristine.

I've gone that route and it's getting harder to find treasures.

I would rather bite the bullet and buy re-issues from quality re-issue labels.

So I think we have to re-think the term "oldies" to include modern pressings of the cream of the crop recordings.

My first source was vinyl, back in the late 1960's.
I never abandoned it,never sold off my lp collection and some of my collection has become sought after and the values have increased.

I don't think we can say the same for any of my cd's in my digital collection.
I wish the same good fortune for those who are entrenched in the digital camp, but I fear I won't be around that long to find out.

Vinyl has survived and is flourishing, despite all the flaws and mechanical inaccuracies attributed to it that some folks like to point out.

If vinyl replay is such an inferior medium, why has it lasted so long and continues to flourish, while cd seems to be on the wane?

It can't just be the nostalgia ticket, becasue cd's have been around for quite some time.

I really believe that for anything to have legs in this hobby, it has to sound good.

If not it will be forgotten .

Quads, Ls3/5a, Acoustats, to name a few classics that I have owned and enjoyed, still sound good and can hold their own to most of today's speakers.People still want those things.

Perhaps they have the kinds of distortions and inaccuracies, that a lot of people find very pleasing.
Maybe just vinyl lovers like them?

I have nothing against trying to strive for accuracy in an audio system,and I try my best to rid my system of electrical and mechanical nasties that can mask the accuracy or what has been recorded.

But accuracy has to go hand in hand with realism,so that the mechanicals do not stand in the way of the music.
Some call this the great accuracy vs musical sound debate.

I don't think one should suffer for the other, there should be a balance struck somewhere, so that accuracy doesn't intrude upon or rob the music of it's ability to suspend our beliefs that what we are listening to happened not yesterday but more than a half century ago.

As well, the system or medium shouldn't be so coloured with pleasant harmonic distortions that we can't distinguish individual hand claps for what they are,and not background noise.

Ignorance is a pretty harsh word to use.Personally it's insulting and demeaning and reeks of arrogance.
It implies that the multitudes of people who enjoy vinyl over digital just don't have a clue or don't "get it" or lack the intellect to understand that the sound they enjoy is full of inaccuracies.

Well call me a dummy if you will, but I am in good company.

At the end of the day we vinyl loving dummies will place another flawed lp on our flawed turntables and listen as that flawed needle gouges out some more shreds of vinyl and sit in awe and enjoy the music as it envelopes around us.My 50 year old lp's should not be tolerable to the ear,yet they have few pops or snaps.

I do use a VPI 16.5 to clean them, and a Hammond bulk tape eraser to demag them.

But I only started to use those for the last 4 years.

Tonite,the ignorant amongst us, those who don't know any better,will be transported to another era or place and get so lost in the music that nothing else matters to them.
The destination not the means to get there is foremost on their minds.

Yup, time to cue up another 5 buck Ray Charles mono lp.