Is a vinyl rig only worth it for oldies?

Dear all: I forgot. Main advantage on those recording manipulations is that in the digital alternative everything happen in the digital dominium: ceros and ones, that permits that the audio signal stay " untouchable " with out phase shifts, distortions, noise and the like that in the analog alternative are added through those recording manipulations.

With out touch the recording signal IMHO in the digital dominium/alternative there is almost nothing you can't do it leaving the recording signal " untouchable ".

Today exist designs ( Phono stages. ) for LP playback that everything " happen " in the digital dominium including the RIAA eq. where this RIAA eq. has no single frequency deviation and distortions as happen in all analog alternatives.

IMHO we can't close our eyes against the digital technology and its several advantages inclusive to help analog.

Regards and enjoy the music,

R.

The vinyl/digital debate is a perfect example of a classic Dilemma.

Both have their strengths and both have their weaknesses. Neither solution alone is perfect to meet the needs of many.

Modern strategic thinking says that one can not analyze their way out of a dilemma. Attempts to do so by definition will always turn out to be futile and just re-inforce the fact that the dilemma exists.

The solution is to apply Synthesis to create something new from both that is leveraged effectively to meet all needs.

To follow on from Mapman's point, there are many attempts to copy the analogue effects in the digital domain as plugins. Some are very good and not far off, and I can only see them getting more effective.

I dream of a world where you plugin your system and with the press of a button you have an exact 300b sound, or a 45 tube, or whichever sound you like all in the digital domain without any of the expense or hassle of the real gear. You could have all the power you want. 1000w 45 tube sound to drive any speaker. There would be libraries of various tube types, TT types with mind boggling accuracy.

No that would be truly awesome.

Dear Mapman: I can't see how we can apply Synthesis to create something new when IMHO the analog alternative ( as I posted in my very first post ) is wrong and full of " anomalies ".

As I posted too, all that software/plug-inns that exist and that is used in the digital recording process has no sense to me: why " copy " something that's wrong by " definition " ?, yes the only reason is because people ask for it, we are hooked by the analog even that's absolutely non-accurate and non-neutral.

Many of us even thing and support that the R2R ( master tapes. ) are de " eden " of the analog and this IMHO is non true and only a myth created not only because our ignorance but for commercial reasons: AHEE corruption !.

IMHO any single open reel machine ( and I say any. ) has several failures. Yes, it is the best analog source but imperfect too, especially against digital one:

some normal specs on digital recording systems gives us numbers like these:

- flat frequency response from DC!!!, -THD lower than 0.004%, - signal to noise 93db RMS unweighted, - dynamic range 93db RMS unweighted, - wow and flutter: unmeasurable!! and I can go on and on.
No one R2R not only can even that can't even dream about.

And exist other analog problems: "" digitization of the audio signal ( ceros and ones. ) virtually eliminates the traditional analog recording problems, such as: background noise, tape hiss, distortion,wow and flutter, limited dynamic range and generation loss.

Since numbers rhater than analog representations are stored in the tape, digital recordings are immune from effects such as printtrhough, tape noise, etc. Audio reconstructed from the numbers are virtually identical to the original. Furthermore, copies of digital recordings are absolutely indistinuishable from the original recording since a copy is an identical set of numbers. """"

And remember that the R2R generate odds harmonics.

IMHO analog is a faulty medium where till today I can't understand ( bevcause my ignorance level. ) where exist any single advantage over digital, I can't understand for sure why I like it other that because I'm accustom to heard/hear it.

A 24/192 digital source as a DVDA is almost perfect and remember that today we have players that use 32bits DACs and recording machines at 32/64 with over 350khz sampling.

IMHO today non-exist a battle between analog vs digital as years ago, today that battle gone because IMHO there is no contest by the analog medium even R2R.

Any one can test almost all what I affirm in this post:

take a direct to dic LP recording like the Shefield Labs: Dave Grusin-- Diyscovered Again.
When this LP was sold out Shefield prssed a " new " LP that came from the analog tape recorded during the direct to disc session.

You don't have to believe in nothing I posted:

hear both LPs and you will know immediatly which one came from the analog tape which one came from the direct disc recording. The differences are not subtle but substantials.

In other direct to disc recordings by M&K happéned the same and you be aware of similar experiences.

The best analog tape (R2R ) IMHO: IS NO ANALOG TAPE, not only as a recording tool but as a playback source.

Can I be wrong?, vertainly but I need and I woul like to learn from some of you why I'm wrong.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

certainly. The Shefield LP title is: Discovered Again.. Sorry for the typos.

R.