The quest


I have a question that may or not be easy to answer: are all efforts to improve digital music just a quest to achieve the quality of sound of the good and old LP? I keep reading expressions like "an almost analog quality" and similar things. Is digital sound just a more convenient means to store and play music that one day may reach the sound qualities of LPs, or we can reasonably expect one day to hear a really more natural ("better") sound from digital sources?
tvfreak
But is "great vinyl sound" really old-fashioned? While I have not been an audiophile that long, I doubt the sound of what is called today great vinyl is the same as what it was 30 years ago. I know my dad had a good sound system, he actually still has it, and the sound is not very good by today's standards. But it was amazing back then.

As someone mentioned above, the improvement pace has been slower in vinyl than digital, but vinyl seems to have improved too.

Also, Tvfreak asked in the OP if digital was "just" convenience, but I don't think about convenience just as a potatoe couch syndrome type of thing. Carefully setting up an extremely accurate vinyl rig is no minor task, requires multiple devices/gadgets (just like digital?), and significant maintenance. Of course, the potatoe couch aspects also have an impact: not as easy to get the media to your hands, and then playing them.

I've chosen not to pursue vinyl since my budget is limited and would rather pursue one avenue and do it right. I run only a computer-based front-end, with tubed pre and tubed amp, and the pre has two volume pots and no remote - hence my differentiation between the flavours in potatoe couchness ;-)

Still this discussion is very interesting to me as I've always kept vinyl as something I might want to pursue some day.

Cheers!
I'm from a generation that was raised on vinyl LPs and for many years
much preferred analog to digital. Things have evolved and I've heard high
quality digital sourced systems that equal or in some cases surpass many
analog systems. So my perspective is there's quite a bit of overlapping
between the two presently. Both can be impressively natural/organic with
emotinal involvement, both can be clinical, edgy, flat and artificial. It
depends on what components are used and system implementation.
IMO it's the quality of the recording rather than the format that's the primary
limiting factor. I can enjoy and live with either format happily if done right.
Charles,
There are so many things wrong with digital playback it almost defies description. Vibration, RFI/EMI, scattered laser light, out of round CDs...it's no wonder stock systems and stock CDs sound thin, compressed, weird, like paper mâché, flat, two dimensional, metallic, discombobulated and dry.
Geoffkait - precisely why I don't use a CD spinner anymore. Computer audio done right is far superior. Some newer spinners are more like computer audio such as the Perfect Wave Transport, so they don't suffer as much from these maladies.

However the primary problem with digital is jitter, followed closely by poor digital filters. Both of these can be fixed in good digital designs.

Other system problems are quite common to both vinyl and digital systems, including: Ground-loop HF noise, preamp and/or DAC compression, noise and distortion. These can limit the performance of either type of system. These are the reason why there is so much variation in the experiences of different posters to these forums, even with the same format, component or cable. These are systems, and anything in the system can affect the SQ. Its the sum of the parts.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio