Can Digital beat our Analog installations?


Having gone a long walk on developing my analog systems I am addicted to phono reproduction. Nevertheless I always kept an eye on CDs and also SACDs. Before I currently updated my digital dCS chain to the complete Scarlatti boxes I experimented on the best wordclocking connections. in the end I decided going for an additional rubidium clock added to my Verona master clock.

I am using also a second system equipped with the Accuphase 800 drive and 801 DAC, an Esoteric XO1 Limited and a Wadia 861 SE for other utilization. Let's concentrate on the dCS stack. These four boxes are sounding such good and analog like that I like to question my friends, Why isn't Digital an alternative to our best analogue chains?

So it's time comparing digital vs. analog systems and maybe some sophisticated digital chains are beating our sophisticated analog systems. Will it be possible?
thuchan
Thuchan, I admire your purchasing power, but the topic has been hashed over beyond ad nauseam. Let me turn the question around: do you like either of your digital rigs better than your EMT927?
Lewm,
You're right, at this point I don't know what you can say that hasn't been said previously. Both formats can sound fine and both can be disappointing, depending on the quality and the set up. I like both.
Jfrech,
clocking cables are running from the clock to transport, dac and upsampler. from the external extension of the clock the bnc cable runs to the rubidium clock (perfection10). In this way the dCS clock is the master but getting more precision by the atomic power :-).

on wordclock cables i refer to the rules:

1. Use good quality 75ohm impedence cable.

2. All cables should be of equal length.

3. All cables should be a short as possible.

which cables are you using on the AES 2 connection using the Vivaldi mode and which Firewire cables do you prefer?