Analog vs Digital Confusion


Thinking about adding Analog to my system, specifically a Turntable, budget is about 5K but I'm having some second thoughts and I'm hoping someone can help, specifically, how can the record sound better? Scenario; an album is released in both CD and Record, the recording is DDD mixed, mastered, etc in the digital domain. It seems to me that to make the master record the process would involve taking the digital recoding and adding an additional D/A process to cut the record? So, bottom line, how can the record sound better than the CD played on compitent CDP?
rpg
It may be helpful to divide the vinyl universe into two rough camps: the
dyed-in-the-wool all analog brigade, which is one of the reasons so many of
the pricey 'audiophile' reissues are of old records. This also includes the
fact that many of those records in original pressings are hard to find,
extremely expensive and rarely in mint condition. When
remastered using digital, you'll get an array of complaints about the sonics-
witness the controversy over the new Beatles set on vinyl. (But even
remasters that remain purely analog are often disappointing compared to
the originals for a variety of reasons). And, as you are no doubt aware,
there is a huge market for
old records, whether just standard issue pop, or collectible gems in all
genres because these predate the digital era.
At the same time, there's lot's of new music that has been mastered
digitally that sounds pretty good on vinyl. I don't make direct comparisons
to CDs because I don't have any digital playback in my main system, it is
vinyl only. But I'm happy to listen to new music, and buy a modest amount.
Some sounds terrific.
I would assume that entering into vinyl, you'd have an opportunity to
experience all sorts of vinyl: old records, reissues/remasters and new
music that is likely to have been recorded/mastered digitally.
I suppose there is one other argument: that 'limitations' of vinyl mask some
of the inherent nastiness of digital. But I don't think there's much validity to
that argument these days. First, digital has come a long way since its
introduction, both in terms of the gear and the know-how to use it in
recording and mastering. Second, a first rate vinyl set-up doesn't really
have to suffer many limitations in its ability to deliver very transparent, lively
sonics.
So, what i think you wind up with is the ability to playback some real jewels
from a by gone era and be amazed at the amount of sonic information in
those grooves; to try some of the better remasters of old records that you
wouldn't likely be able to find or want to buy at collector prices, and you can
still listen to many, not all of the latest releases on vinyl, when released in a
medium that may not be 'better' than digital but is still pretty
good.
Postscript: even before the advent of digital, there were still horrible
recordings, and over a good vinyl rig, you'll hear the good, the bad, and the
ugly.
Rgp; I've been playing LPs for more than 40 years and have a CDP and a tube buffer that makes for some very listenable CD playback. I could be content listening to only digital music. But I continue to listen to vinyl mainly because I enjoy the "ritual" of setting up a turntable, installing and aligning a cartridge, cleaning records, and then carefully setting the stylus in the groove to listen to treasured LPs.

Vinyl analog vs CD digital isn't a choice or debate, they are but two forms of potential music playback. The source material is irrelevant; both analog and digital sources can be excellent, or not. And both forms of playback can be rewarding but each have their benefits and drawbacks. I think of records and CDs in context with the following analogies...

VINYL ANALOG - CD DIGITAL
dry flies - spinning lures
Nordic skis - Alpine skis
old 3-speed bicycle - modern racing bicycle
wood stove - electric heater
French press - Kuerig brewer

Clumsy analogies but if you're at all familiar with any of them you get the idea. Vinyl isn't just about the music, it's about playing the music. There's an element of tradition and, for some, nostalgia involved with vinyl. So if you think you might enjoy the "ritual" of setting up and maintaining a turntable, tonearm, and cartridge and cleaning and playing LPs then give it a try. But don't get into vinyl if you think you're going to experience a much better sound. I'm not convinced that vinyl is inherently much better if someone has a decent CDP (in comparison with a similarly decent turntable) and plays music from similarly good sources.

Regards,
Tom
A good case in point would be the LP & CD of Eric Clapton Unplugged, a digital DDD recording. I have qued up both and compared the two with the flip of a switch, The LP sounds better when (as does most music)
played on the Well Tempered Reference with a Van Den Hul Colibri MC Cartridge than the CD on the Levinson 390S CD Player. I believe the D/A converter used to produce the LP is far better than we are ever likely to own.
Also consider the Turntable/LP route is a Rose with Big Thorns,Huge expense of phono cartridges,LP cleaning ect.
LP's are not a media of convenience, you would be better off to use the $ to upgrade to the best CD player unless you are Weathy or an LP Audio-nut like me.(Even so I play CD's 98% of the time, those Mega-buck needles only last 1000 to 3000 hours). $$$ OUCH!
PS: I think the Bandwidth Highs & Lows on LP's are wider.
However with a really top hi-end system, it's possible to get so close you won't miss LP's.