Is a vinyl rig only worth it for oldies?

Rual, I want to be clear, when you say digital is better what digital are you talking about, CD? SACD? 96K/24? 192K/24bit? This is in the interest of learning.

And your "electronics that have the capacity to shows the best of LP/analog the best of digital where I "discovery" that superiority" again could you be more specific about what digital format and even give some examples of the music.

By electronics I assume you mean your entire system. Its interesting to learn about your do it your self phono preamp. Congratulations on building one. I assume you tried to sell this product but no market developed? I think that making a buck selling audio products would be a very hard thing to do.

But as a audio hobbiest I am suppose to believe that your mystery phono pre amp that never found a real market is the standard for sweeping statements?

And since you brought up the "capacity of your electronics" do you rely on old ADS speakers for your judgments? Those were not the best option back in the day. Have you updated the crossovers? How old are those capacitors? If you built a phono pre you know that capacitors built now are better than the ones built in the 80s generally speaking. And I thought there were reasons why mfgs moved away from dome midranges. FWIW I have ADS 880s and L400. They are much further down the line than yours and they do have an interesting sound but nothing that would be call accurate.

I don't mean to bust your chops but when people take on the position of expert and make sweeping statements it does not hurt to examine things a little.

TD

Dear Tdaudio: Please read what I posted in this thread to know which digital source I'm talking about.

About my audio system you can go to my Agon virtual system where you can find out all the answers for your questions.

About my Phonolinepreamp I can give you email of owners that can attest not what I'm saying but what they think of its quality performance level.
What I can say about: nothing that you can heard on your today system or that you experienced in your system.

In the other side: what or which is your position/opinion on that whole subject and why?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Chadeffect: The high end audio items design job is directly related with sales.

Why some electronics are not ready to today digital technology?: because almost all those designs are for the analog technology that does not ask superior/higher hardware characteristics.

Is something like the phono stages that for many years were and are designed to cope LOMCs but not to fulfil the MM/MI alternative needs too.

Many LOMC lovers that tested the MM/MI alternative stay hoocked with the LOMCs and do not like to much the MM/MI alternative: why? because their phono stages can fulfil the MM/MI asking needs so they never had/have the opportunity to hear what the MM/MI can really shows to them. So, IMHO all their judgement and diminished opinions on the MM/MI alternative are faulty/heavely un-true.
At one side all those people have everything with the specific needs/set-up demanded by the LOMC cartridges and when in that same system tested a MM/MI cartridge the hardware is non-adecuate to fulfil the cartridge demands as load impedance/capacitance and inside electronic design for the MM/MI alternative.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Can't fulfil the MM/MI asking needs.

Sorry for the typo.

R.

I've been catching up on this thread,still more to read, but thought I'd like to add.

Way back ,early in this thread I stated a preference for the recording talents of the folks from the 60's,who had none of the toys that the the new crop of "educated" recording engineers have today.

You know, all the stuff that can transform mediocre musicians into giants,and make live vs recorded sound a mute point to argue about.

I acknowledge that technology has progressed in the last two decades.

But has it given us any new classics?

Where's the new Kind Of Blue?

Is it Green Day?

Ok so I'm old,but it's not nostalgia.

I didn't like or appreciate KInd of Blue until a decade ago,when I heard it for the first time,on CD!

The sonics were great,yet it was a simple recording using simple, primitive gear by todays standards.

And yet something was captured on those analog master tapes,something that seems to be missing with most of todays newest all digital recordings.

I have heard some pretty poor examples of modern recording techniques that even good vinyl pressings can't fix.

For me, the best digital recordings played back on good digital gear,seems to be a pretty faithful reproduction of what went on in the studio.

By that, I mean you will hear all the processing that went on to bring a make believe reality into your home.

It's not the same as capturing the reality of a recording of real musicians playing in a real room(with real distortions)in real time.

The older simpler recording of the golden age, just sound more natural because they are.

There was little or no manipulation of reality.

You can't say the same for many of todays recordings.

They are the reality or conception of what the engineer/producer wants us to believe is reality.Or the total absence of it,depending on how far you want to alter and tinker with what was recorded.

You could compare this to the realist types of painting to the more abstract versions of paintings.

One strives to capture reality, the other strives to interpret it.

You can choose which one suits your own tastes.

There's lots of fun listening to studio manipulated masterpieces,and purist recordings.

What it comes down to is, which one would you use to assemble a hifi system?

Again this rests with one's experience to how live instruments sound.So that you can recognize when they are reproduced naturally or in altered form.Then judge what job your gear is doing.How much is it altering reality?
Would you like tone controls,add some more bass?Just how would you like it to sound?

Since few of us were there at the session, how would we know anyways if we did re-capture the same sonics?

Even the end user can't resist twiddling with the mix when given the chance.

Does anyone know what " real" is amnymore?

Do they even want it?

Perhaps it's a generational thing.
I personnally have no interest in any of the "reality" type programs that are thrust at us.
For me it's not a reality that I can relate to, and as such I find nothing to interest me.
It's a production, someone's take on what reality is for the masses of folks who are interested in such shows.

Much the way I find most modern recordings of modern groups are.

The music is very derivitive, the playing can be great, but the recordings are so altered, how can you tell if they are any good?

Only by seeing them live?

Then again look at all the lip syncing, and voice manipulations in supposedly live performances.

If oldies recordings more closely represent reality and that's what turns you on, then jump in.Buy that vinyl rig.

You also may like the way vinyl can reproduce the other reality of the recording studio too on good pressings.

Pink Floyd anyone?