What you're saying might be true for some, but I would disagree. Good analog setups are free of what you call the "well documented" defects, just as good digital is free from much of what analog lovers dislike about digital. I was raised on analog, but went totally digital when I re-entered the world of the high end in the early 2000s. I had an excellent CD player in the 10K range that I used for several years and I basically convinced myself that it wasn't going to get better without spending a lot more money. After that, with all the talk about analog, I decided to try a $1000 turntable setup just to see if I would like fooling around with records again. Even that modest analog setup in some ways outperformed my digital rig and I decided that it would be worth it to invest in something better. When I did, I discovered that what I thought were artifacts inherent to vinyl, such as resonances, inner groove mistracking, noise, were gone. Same with digital. When you get something good, the digital signatures are minimized. I had the opportunity to hear a Linn CD12 a bit back and it just knocked my out with its musicality and ability to unravel the layers of music. Unfortunately for me, the really good digital - the stuff that would make me forget analog, is just too expensive.
Digital vs Analog - A supposition...
As has been the truth since the advent of digital storage and playback of music, there are those who claim one is better than the other and also quite a few claiming the opposite.
Please allow me to offer a bit of an explanation. Keep in mind, this explanation does not purport to be a scientifically-based one. Rather it is is simply a thought that popped into my head a few nights ago during one of my never-ending basttles with insomnia.
I'm thinking that the vinyl junkies may staunchly defend their method of playback simply because it is what they were weaned on and lived with throughout their formative years. Vinyl sounds more "natural" because its playback characteristics are what they heard from the very beginning and therefore it is their standard of playback quality.
They are attuned to vinyl's various (and well-documented) defects and those defects are part of what comprises the "sound" of vinyl and perfect playback. Therefore, the absence of any of these defects would constitute a deficiency of any competing technology.
Discuss amongst yourselves....
-RW-
Please allow me to offer a bit of an explanation. Keep in mind, this explanation does not purport to be a scientifically-based one. Rather it is is simply a thought that popped into my head a few nights ago during one of my never-ending basttles with insomnia.
I'm thinking that the vinyl junkies may staunchly defend their method of playback simply because it is what they were weaned on and lived with throughout their formative years. Vinyl sounds more "natural" because its playback characteristics are what they heard from the very beginning and therefore it is their standard of playback quality.
They are attuned to vinyl's various (and well-documented) defects and those defects are part of what comprises the "sound" of vinyl and perfect playback. Therefore, the absence of any of these defects would constitute a deficiency of any competing technology.
Discuss amongst yourselves....
-RW-