Pieces of music that digital can't get right


Ok I have a litmus test for digital when ever I have the rare option of upgrading my digital front end. Its tough on digital. Brutally tortuous and unforgiving. Digital proponents have a difficult time accepting these sonic tests. 
1. Ok here is the first one. On the opening of America's "Ventura Highway" the opening dueling guitars are ambient and bounce off each channel very pleasantly in the analog domain. In the digital domain the channels are totally separate and too clean and sterile lifeless sounding. They are  not talking to each other It was like this with ny Marantz 8005 but the SA-10 gets halfway there.
2. In the opening of "I Feel Fine" by the Beatles the electric guitar sounds alive with ambiance and decay. The Digital is clean and lifeless.
 Ok am I right with these observation?. I have a pretty good SACD player in SA-10. Its no slouch. Do the mega expensive super smart and accurate DACs get my two above mentioned  passages right? Or are we hearing colored vinyl artifacts. Well if we are I like the record better!
blueranger

"Ok am I right with these observation?."

Blueranger, your using the same components for both sources. One input is "tuned" to your Table. Your CDP needs it's own system so you can tune it in to your digital source.

Systems using CD's require completely different sonic settings vs systems tuned to vinyl.

Michael Green

http://www.michaelgreenaudio.net/

John Cage 4’33.
The Black silences in Digital are so unrealistic.  In a real concert performance, audience members will be shifting in their seats, whispering to their neighbors, blowing their noses, passing gas, whatever...Vinyl, with it’s pops, clicks, wow, flutter, cartridge hum, and other assorted sonic detritus would be so much closer to the real thing

Actually 4'33" is a good example. If someone is experiencing black silences with digital that's a sign that the system is out of tune.


mg

4’33’’ is the most stupid thing imaginable, I feel genuinely worried for the sanity of anyone who goes to concerts or puts on vinyl or a CD to ’’listen’’to it. I once walked out of a concert because the Quartet announced they were going to play it as an encore. It is an assault on our intelligence.
It looks like you’re comparing two completely different pressings. That introduces a variable that makes drawing any conclusion about the differences between analog and digital invalid.

One way to conduct a meaningful comparison is to digitize a good LP. If the digital copy can reproduce all of the LP’s nuances - or not - then you can draw a meaningful conclusion from that.
michaelgreenaudio

Blueranger, your using the same components for both sources. One input is "tuned" to your Table. Your CDP needs it’s own system so you can tune it in to your digital source.
I think this is completely mistaken. A properly set up system can play analog and digital recordings equally - within the limits of each format. Over the years, as digital has continually improved, I have found that good digital and good analog sound increasingly alike on my system. The notion that each source requires its own system is really misguided, imo, and suggests that neither system is sounding its best.

Old proverb: A man with two clocks never knows the correct time.


It looks like you’re comparing two completely different pressings. That introduces a variable that makes drawing any conclusion about the differences between analog and digital invalid.
This.  You aren't controlling for the differences in how the source discs came to be produced.  A digital copy of a needle drop will still be producing the unique qualities of the analog.  I don't see any way of really comparing apples with apples.  There are always differences introduced into the recording or processing chain before the medium gets to whichever player.

For me personally, I don’t use multi-source same system settings for doing any referencing.

This was a big issue back in the Tape Vinyl source days, and was one of the major reasons Equalizers were used. It never really worked, using preamp sections with multi-sources but we always had frequency adjusting tools to somewhat help, but it never really was a purist approach. In reality to have a true discrete system you would only have one source, or even one input, for the system. HEA tried to bend the rules on that one, but that’s not being discrete.

You know, saying systems that only have one volume control with several inputs is being discrete is a bit of a scam. Saying one volume control is discrete period, is a scam when you think about it.

MG

Every source device may require unique tweaks to get optimal results, whether in same or different systems.

I would go one step further and say "every source device does require unique tweaks to get optimal results".


MG

"Old proverb: A man with two clocks never knows the correct time."

It turns out that in order to get all sample-rates, digital requires two different base clock frequencies, so digital uses two clocks.....

There are a number of effects that you could be hearing here:

1) pressing is different

2) your digital front-end/DAC is not up to snuff - too much internal jitter or too much distortion from the D/A in the CDP

3) your commercial disks are creating too much jitter - treat them and apply a rubberized coating to the tops to reduce jitter.  Rewrite the disk to a good quality CDROM disk like Mitsui gold audio master.


Steve N .

michaelgreenaudio

For me personally, I don’t use multi-source same system settings for doing any referencing.
I'm not even sure what this means.


Post removed 
The best way to avoid the two-clock jitter problem is to go pleisiochronous. Problem solved.
Digital cannot get Heifetz’ Guarneri violin to sound right at all. It makes it sound like a respectable Chinese violin. Even the extinct audio cassette does much better.
Really good cymbals---Paiste 602's, old Zildjian's made in Turkey (played the best Jazz drummers in the 1950's and 60's), and modern Turkish-made Bosphorus---all of which I own and play---can sound too "splashy" after sub-par digitization.
I would go even one step further and say "every source device does require unique tweaks to get optimal-for-your-taste results".

As far as original post goes, you are comparing different products (CD vs. LP, I assume) that were processed differently and should hardly expect them to act in the same way. Even if everything after the disc itself is perfectly aligned in the universe (which it probably is not). For that reason, both Michael Green’s and cleeds’ inputs may be correct in their own ways. If it is about listening to music,you may need to tune/tweak each set-up to achieve the sound you prefer on both or, if academically trying to compare analog vs. digital, you may need to digitize the record first.

I guess, in theory, you could also press a record of your CD and see where that leads you. Who was it that said that inconvenience is not that important in this sport? It was on another thread.

America's "Ventura Highway"  on my SACD  is superb and I play via Marantz 8802a through a  L.K.S dac 

I've always though two recordings sounded much better in analogue : Frank Zappa's Hot Rats and Harris's  3rd. I can't tell the difference with a lot of recordings but then again I'm just a sub-audiophile.
Even though I enjoy the convenience of digital, I most love my analogue.
Analog, wither tape or LP, for better or worse, is the product of - Tit for Tat (for every action an equal and opposite reaction - from the performance to the master recording. Along with a bit of noise, there is a sense of ambiance and life that digital just doesn’t quite capture.
But then, who am I to say - I still prefer the images captured from an old Hasselblad 8x10 to any digital camera on the market...Jim

I was at a friends home to help him move in a new set of speakers. He has a very nice system and thought he would impress me by playing a 180 grain vinyl pressing of Van Morrison's "No Guru". As soon as the stylus hit the surface, there it was, that unmistakable background rumble and snap, crackle, pop. I have the same recording on CD which I'll take any day. The quality of the recording also plays a major role in sound quality.  
@falconquest Your friend might benefit from a higher quality phono amplifier.  High quality units have enough dynamic headroom that the pops and clicks present on some vinyl are minimized.
falconquest
... He has a very nice system and thought he would impress me ... As soon as the stylus hit the surface, there it was, that unmistakable background rumble and snap, crackle, pop.
It sounds like his "nice system" isn’t so nice. If that’s what you heard as soon as the stylus landed on the LP, something was amiss. And given that you heard both rumble and a noisy LP surface, it’s likely that more than one thing was wrong with his system. That’s not especially surprising, however - I’ve found that many users have improperly setup turntables.

Or, perhaps he just had a really bad pressing. That can happen, too.
Every Symphony ever written .
I think the title should be 'Digital, that a system can't get right'.


Compression of the cd sounds like the issue? I left analogue a long time ago due to the artifacts I got with lp’s. However there is a lot of crap cd’s I have bought that sound like they are playing out of a paper sack. Even some HD track 24/96 recordings sound awful. But when digital is done correctly to me its hard to beat. Steely Dan Gaucho in 24 bit is good. I do foundly remember DD Sheffield Lab I’ve got the music in me - Pressure Cooker. Kinda wish I had analogue gear to hear it on my system now. If analog consistantly trumps good HD digital then I would go back, but I doubt that’s the case from my limited listening.