Dear Tbg/Mapman: This is something I posted/answered time ago in other thread about digital and analog comparison:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I agree, the digital can't approach that type of LP sound. IMHO : Why can't approach it?, because analog/LP is totally faulty.
The analog signal is heavily manipulated, let see it:
when recorded and to be cutted ( LP. ) the signal must be equalized according to the RIAA standard and this means and equalization that goes from 20hz to 20khz +,- 20dbs!!!!!!!this deemphasis means added distortions, phase chnages, non-linear anomalies, added noise, additional stages where the signal have to pass through.
Then the signal is trasfered to vinyl with all imperfections where does not exist a perfect cutting system, here there is several kind of signal loses: certainly what is in the recording was not what was recorded before all that proccess.
When we want to hear the LP in our audio system that analog signal must be recovery through the phono stage for we can attain a flat frequency response ( just like exist ( with out RIAA eq. ) in a digital medium. ) so inside the phono stage that signal pass again for an additional RIAA eq. ( this time an inverse eq. ) with all the heavy degradation: distortions, phase problems, added noise, colorations, etc, etc, etc.
Inside that phono stage the very low output signal must be amplified ( sometimes 10K times!!! ) to a level where the preamp can handle it as it handle in "; natural"; way the digital signal that has a lot higher output level. Through the high gain proccess the signal pass through 3-5 additional stages that continue degrading the signal continue adding more distortions ( of every kind ), nothing of this happen with the digital medium. That very low output signal characteristic makes that the signal be extremely sensitive to be degraded by everykind of " pollulation " ( electrical/magnetic. ) where the higher digital output signal is a lot less suceptible of that kind of degradations.
All those is what happen to an electronics level now we have to add the worst of all the signal manipulation:
a cartridge to " read " the recorded information, a cartridge is a rudimentary " instrument " for say the least. Cartridge designers make some kind of " magic "/tremendous efforts for the cartridge can makes its critical/titanic job.
A cartridge is an " unstable " tool, everything affect its performance: kind of cantilever and cantilever build material, stylus shape and with which kind of quality was builded, room temperature, kind and quality of cartridge suspension, cartridge motor design, cartridge body resonances, cartridge ridiculous pin connectors, etc, etc, each part of the cartridge degraded the original signal with out exception.
After that the cartridge must be mounted in a tonearm for it can ride the LP and one of the first challenges that the signal has to deal with are the " stupid " tonearm wire connectors to the cartridge and then the in ternal tonearm wire and the the additional IC between the tonearm and the phono stage. In all those links the signal continue degrading, this does not happen in the digital alternative: so no signal degradation.
But the worst for the " end " ( sometimes I think the analog medium is: endless of problems. ):
now the stylus tip hit the LP grooves and at microscopic level that stylus tip start a heavy fight against the grooves/its compliance and tracking habilities to stay in the grooves to be in touch always and this happen almost never ( especialy with low compliance cartridges as the LOMC ones. ).
The stylus tip is " jumping " generating distortions and harmonic distortions. All this " fight " is transmited through the cartridge body to the tonearm which start to resonate ( adding distorions, non.linear anomalies, atc, atc. ) according those cartridge self resonances and according the cartridge compliance/tonearm effective mass.
But all the information captured by the cartrdige has not only a doses of tracking distortions becuase non-perfect cartridge tracking habilities but distortions because the stylus tip never coincide with the grooves never coincide on how the grooves were cutted!!!!! not even in a linear tracking tonearms.
Why is that? for several reasons: the LPs comes all with waves and off-center hole that preclude a perfect alignement trhough all the LP tracks. There is no perfect tonearm/cartridge set up it doesw not matters which geometry alignment we choose: Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson, etc, etc, in all them there is tracking errors for a pivoted tonearm and that tracking errors means added distortions in the signal path.
Btw and talking of set up there is no perfect cartridge set up_ VTA/SRA/azymuth, overhang/etc, load impedance, load capacitance, etc, etc.
All these parameters all the playback time are changing because all the LP imperfections including different LP weights, excentricity LP " center " hole.
Don't forget the TT speed unaccuracies, speed unstability, rumble, wow&fluter, platter resonances, TT bearing ones, tonearm/TT mount board feedback and of course system SPL feedback that affect every analog rig.
I can go on and on and on with all the " thousands " degradation links where the analog signal must pass but as an example I think is enough.
Gentlemans, IMHO it is a " miracle " that we all after all those kind of degradations we still can enjoy the analog sounds!
+++++ " it was the smoothest, most organic, and 3d sound that ever came out of my speakers... " +++++ ( speaking of LP. )
these and other adjectives that we audiophiles used to use when refering to LP quality performance experiences does not comes in the recording in the original recording , those " characteristics " are a result of the heavy degradation that suffer the analog signal, degradation that does not exist in the digital alternative so that's why both mediums sounds different.
Of course that digital has its own trade-offs, well I prefer it: is truer to the recording.
That we like it the analog alternative does not confirms and does not means in any sense that is right, IMHO is wrong almost dead wrong.
I prefer digital HR ( DVDA: 24/192 ) for music sound reproduction at home because I 'm nearest to the original sound that passed through the recording microphones with lower " artefacts " than in the analog domain.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. " +++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
and digital is still improving " every day " so the digital future is way promisory against the analog that is almost static.
I'm still on the quest of the very last boundaries on anlaog/LP reproduction and I'm doing by my self ( for many years. ) because the AHEE corruption does not help about but all the way the other side around: the AHEE has not interest that we can achieve the last analog boundary/frontier speaking on quality level performance. Pity, for say the least.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
