When is digital going to get the soul of music?

That would be something to see, Guidocorona! It would have to be all silver, with pebbles placed at appropriate locations.

I'm trying to understand how one gets off on digital. Is it the individual sounds sounding so life-like? I have heard some incredible sounding digital. For instance, at the Stereophile hi-end show in San Francisco in 1988(?). They were using Apogee speakers with Krell electronics, and were playing the Bodyguard(not sure of the title) cd by Whitney Houston. The sound absolutely astounded me. I could hear where, in her throat, the sound was coming from. The problem, for me, was that it didn't drive me nuts(like analog lp's) to listen to it again. Why is that?

I also wonder if the recording mechanism of digital is inherently flawed. How easy would it be to double the sampling rate(this question dates me, as far as when I was last interested in digital)? And Tvad, I'm working backwards. In other words, analog does it for me, and digital doesn't. My question is why?

Maybe digital is equivalent to Linn's philosophy, in a way. Until they suggested the foot-tapping way to evaluate equipment, people didn't look at things that way(and I'm not saying that is the only way to look at things). Is there a way of looking at digital that is equivalent(Does that sound dogmatic enough for the therapist?). For instance, at Stereophile's High-End show, circa 1984, at the Dumphy in San Mateo, I was one of the few that appreciated the Linn Kan's(no bass, etc.) virtues. I'm not talking about clicks and pops here, as I'm sure analog provides many of(especially if that's what you are looking for). The good analog setups separate the clicks and pops from the music.

I hope no one gets offended by what I say(after all, I have been diagnosed by a professional). Who would think that I'm not interested in an almost complete catalog of Neil Young's music on one disc(that I could play in my car)? I'm more interested in the discussion. You have to understand, digital has cried "wolf" for so many years, that I am somewhat jaded(and dated). I know there has been music after 1981, and I am interested in enjoying that music. Maybe I'm actually asking for advice? I will be listing a few things that have been suggested to me about what I need in digital. To dispell the notion that I have no access to money, let me just say that I spent $3700 on a front end, $2000 on amps, and $1000 on wires in the last year.

This may sound stupid. I have listened to my daughter's(does that date me somewhat?) car stereo. She played Elton John's Greatest Hits. Listening to songs that I am familiar with, it hit all the right notes, had great separation, and maybe added some details that I hadn't noticed before. My friend did the same, in his car, with Neil Young's Greatest Hits(or equivalent). You see, in analogue, that would indicate that those cd's were superior. The problem is playing those records at home(in analog)would kill those cd's. What gives? (And they wonder why I don't understand cd?)

I just want to mention(again) that in a properly setup analog system, clicks and pops are separated from the music(i.e., when listening to the music, you won't hear{or it won't intrude) the pops and clicks. Maybe we need some turntable designers to say something here(but don't worry, it's true in my system, and I'm sure, many others.).

Guidocorona, I believe, with me, you hit the nail on the head. I do believe that I have health problems.

Actually, I just noticed that D edwards answered my question about how to listen to digital. He said that you need surround-sound, I believe.

I just want to correct the statement that rumble is in the same spectra(is that a word?) as ticks and pops. I believe ticks and pops are way up in the khz, but also that's where extra-musical stuff is.

My ticks and pops submission brings me to a previous point and inquiry. I would suggest that when listening to analog, one listens to the music(and not the ticks and pops). That is how one listens to analog. I, therefore, want to repeat the question,"is there a way to listen to digital?". My Linn Kan's comments were made for the same reason. When one listens to the Kan's, in terms of conveying the beat, they make sense.

I guess these discussions must get personal? Boa2, I like how you signed yours with Aires. It seems like if one doesn't like the message, we kill the messenger? I'm not sure I'm putting out a message. I also think that it's about time a discussion like this takes place.

What I meant Boa2 was that the top ten interconnects were going to heavily favor older ones that have been superceded recently. I wanted to give a balance to someone who might use the answers for a purchase decision.

Isn't audio just a suspension of belief(or is that disbelief)? Whatever does this provides an escape from our day-to-day life. Analog(for me)does this and(this opens up a pandora's box) also changes the brainwaves. I am interested in digital doing this(I'm limited to 1981 and earlier albums.). I just need to know what(equipment?) is necessary.

Tvad, heck, no one understands me anyhow(Do you think it would help if I used less parentheses?).

Tvad, I appreciate your heads-up about my writings. I can see it from your 12-step comments. I may deviate a little bit from the main subject from now on, but I can see that it is harder to follow what I'm saying when I use parenthesis.

Don't get mad at me for posting this. Although I believe that I should do research in the area of the best cd players for the money, I have a problem. In many cases, I get tense listening to cd. I know that many people don't, so I'm not sure that their advice might apply to me. I have heard that tubes might help this. There is another problem. Sometimes digital doesn't make sense to me-especially with high-end players. With cheaper systems, cd can sometimes sound too hard for me. Anyhow, just some thoughts. Thanks Tvad.

Yes, actually it's been more than 15 posts. I want to point out Oneobgyn's post on Audiogon about his system. I couldn't get it here, so maybe it requires looking up. I'm suprised by the cost of his Wilson X-2's, which are over $100,000. Anyhow, I liken Ori's X-2's to Koetsu cartridges, in that they convey something about music that escapes most components. I want to introduce another subject here. I know that Audiogon is about high-end, but I'm wondering if there is anything that can be done about car stereo's cd players. This is mainly where I hear the hardness that I speak of. Would something like Mapleshade's reveal and another thing, plus iconoclast do something to alleviate that?

Tvad, I want to apologize to you. I believe my last post short-shifted you. You have very interesting things to say. It's just, with me, sometimes, it triggers an inappropriate response. I would guess that you are a Scorpio, but I've lately struck-out in that area. I actually had retired Oritek X-1's, in favor or Elf Audio's ccc interconnects, and told Ori about that. Yes, I consider him a friend. He emailed me and said if you want your PRAT, here it is. He meant the X-2's. Yes, I'm a shrill for the masses that want, or need, music in the home. If you look at my moniker on Audio Circles, you would understand where I'm coming from. I'm not saying that it is superior, since I haven't heard the best. I hope to hear close to the best soon. I just have an obligation to say the truth, in terms of what's affordable to the average guy. I stand by what I said.

I want to apologize to Lkdog. I never get the motives of people right, and there were hidden motives in my asking the question. First, I heard a cd by Connie Dover,"Last Night by the River" at Ori's, of Oritek Audio, house that was listenable to me. This interested me a little in cd, since I'm stuck with 1981 or earlier albums. Second, I wanted to point out to the youngsters that analog can be a cheap way to enjoy music. Third, I actually was hoping to discuss ways to make cd more enjoyable. I certainly don't want to be responsible for someone who is an audiophile and a therapist, which is very unique, to withhold his insight on things.

"Digital is very linear and its dynamic range is and can be disconcerting to listeners." D_edwards, you hit the nail on the head for me. Maybe that is what causes my tension when listening to cd? BTW, I might have an opportunity to hear a super high-end system built around digital soon. He posted his system on audiogon. He goes by Oneobgyn.

Let me disclose my personal relationship with Ori of Oritek Audio. I went to his house to purchase a pair of X-1's. I spent 3 hours listening to his system while waiting out rush hour. I then emailed him a bit, mostly criticizing his X-1's in my system. This turned out to be interaction problems with my Signal Cable Silver Resolution interconnects. He emailed me, saying if you want your PRAT, my X-2's have it. I went to buy them, and spent about 2 hours listening to his system while having my Nuforce's updated. I've emailed him since, raving about their sound. Is that a personal relationship?

Plato, I am still waiting on your response. You really helped me with the Signal Cable Silver Resolutions for the Nuforce. I trust what you say.

"The old interminable and unresolvable LP versus digital car stereo argument." Lkdog, that's great! I didn't chose to put the forum here. Maybe the use of the word digital caused it to be put here?

I just wanted to mention a few things here about digital. One well-respected reviewer says that he has "a 1985 chip, no oversampling, no digital filter, and a proprietary tube-based, re-construction filter at the end. I know that someone here recommended oversampling. Someone else said that advances in the last 4-5 years have elevated cd playback. A designer said that DSP corrections are where it's at. There was one other thing mentioned, but I think it might have to do with what Meitner does(I can't find it.)? Any further thoughts?

That other thing mentioned was " the original multi-MB sampling rate of Sony hi-res format(SDS) was found by TAS to be superior to analog".

I want to defend Tvad here. First, he posts a lot. Second, I believe that he gets more out of posts on audiogon than almost anyone. That is why, I believe, that he is insistent on people posting properly. I also suspect that he might actually be a well-respected reviewer for an audiophile publication(or should be). Also, a very interesting post, Jaybo.

It turns out that Aplhifi lives less than one mile from me, and I will be bringing over the Oritek X-1's and X-2's for an audition on Saturday.

I just got back from Alphifi's, and I appreciate the fact that you guys haven't actually call me a neophyte. He, and many others out there, are far, far more experienced than I am. Now, I have to say that Alphifi has made all his own equipment, including interconnects. He may be selling these interconnects. They deserve to be heard. They definitely gave me pause for thought. I do want to say to the less experienced to still trust your own ears. I also know that back in the day, that the Linn way of PRAT helped me know what to look for. Today with digital, PRAT is almost a given, but I think it helps to have some way of evaluating what is better.

Sorry about the doubling of the same post. The point that Aplhifi was saying about the digital recording mechanism not being that much of a problem, might have been proven by that DVD-A disc that he recorded.

But, what about the soul of the music? Tvad, you have to admit that it is a catchy title? I think I evaluate reproduced music now by how it affects me after I've listened. Things like changing my mood, relaxing me, getting the serotonin going. Guidocorona, I told Aplhifi that it made me tense at first, but later that went away. It had definitely affected me positively after the listening session was done. I only heard one song comparing Oritek X-2's and Aplhifi's interconnects. I know you've heard this before, but I need more time to compare.

I have to mention one more thing about listening at Aplhifi. The high I get from listening to reproduced music was more pronounced and longer lasting than I get from my system. I thought maybe it was due to tubes, as Gunbei suggests. Aplhifi has a tube output, I believe, on his player and his amp has a tube input. I took a look at Aplhifi's web-site, and there might be more to it. Maybe Aplhifi can say something on this?

I want to apologize Aplhifi, for misspelling your name, and thanks for having me over there. I also heard that DVD-A disc that Aplhifi made, and my comment was "this sounds like analog vinyl". I did notice that the most natural sounding discs were originally recorded in analog. That would be an Elvis Pressly recording, a Nat King Cole made by Reference Recordings, plus that DVD-A Aplhifi recorded. This might be related to what Jlambrick and the guy who recommended Mapleshade's cd's were saying. C5150, this might relate to your point. Discussions are good.

Aplhifi, thanks for the correction, but that was fantastic Nat King Cole. I had one question, though. You showed by that direct from turntable to digital disc that it's not necessarily digial, per se, that is a problem. But I think we played a cd that had what I would call unnatural detail in their singing. With Elvis and Nat, it was a given that that was how they sounded. With the all digital cd, we heard details that almost distracted me. I'm thinking that I heard one voice where it seemed like it was coming from the left side of his throat. I'm sure that was where it was coming from, it's just not what I would expect to hear live. It can't be the recording technique after 25 years of digital, can it?

This will show my ignorance, but by recording techniques, I meant something like the singer who's voice was coming from the left side of his throat to maybe step further away from the microphone to give a more natural presentation. D_edwards, would surround sound help this a bit? I still can't get over the high I got when I listened to Aplhifi's system. If I judged it a 15, I judge mine a 1 or less. I do know that when I'm away from my all analog system, that the songs start playing through my head. Does digital do that?

C5150, I've just joined your ranks, for reasons other than your own. I'm confused from my audition of Aplhifi's sytem. Fortunately, he sells what I heard. First though, I have to understand it. It almost seemed like it didn't matter what was being played. It affected me so much, that it was a letdown to even think about playing my system. My sytem still has something that causes the songs to play in my head when I'm away from it, but the way it affects me after listening to it is not comparable to Aplhifi's. Now, I don't want to add to your confusion, but maybe he's on to something. I'm trying to investigate it.

I've decided to buy Alphifi's Denon 3910, and I don't own any cd's.

Guidocorona, I think is was a combination of the afteraffects of listening at Aplhifi combined with his proof that it wasn't the digital recording process that was the problem. I also experienced some of what I' de call digital effects not driving me crazy. Maybe that would be analogous to the ticks and pops on records driving some people crazy? I have to ask a question, though. I heard an Eric Clapton cd, in which I found the dynamics to be different than what I was comfortable with. Do I need to speed up my listening process or something?

I can't find the comment, but he said something like I last listened to digital in 1988, enough said. His comment has a ring of truth, but I want to address the importance of history here. For instance, I 100% deoxited and 100% progolded my Oritek X-2 interconnects recently. At first they sounded harder, later that changed. To see if they benefited from this, I went back to my old Hi-Fi Answers information. It said that if something got louder after a change, it was better(this is in the analog days). Another thing they said, if it made more albums listenable it was better. I would have to agree, but I put the final decision on the Ori, of Oritek Audio.

I want to address something else about history here. I am 54 years old and I count on something I did over 25 years ago as important, or more so, than anything I have done since. I tried to set up an Ariston RD11E with a Grace arm, and Osawa-22 mat. The belt kept coming off. It was almost impossible, yet I learned a lot. I learned that one spring corresponded to what comes out of one speaker. Another spring corresponded to what comes out of the other speaker. The third spring had to do with the middle. I also learned that its three feet were also audible. One side of the cartridge screws(its alignment) corresponded to what one heard from one speaker. The other side of the cartridge corresponded to what comes out of the other speaker. Anti-skate is also audible. Just understand the theory and use the whole record on anti-skate.

My last two comments were a prelude to my next statement, mostly directed to the ecomically challenged out there. You can get music from something like a Rega-Planar 3(straight arm, preferable), or as Alex suggests, a Music Hall turntable. The software here can cost as little as a dollar. My recommendation is for pre-1982 albums.

Tgun5, you have a very good post. I am buying a cd player from Aplhifi. I hope to enjoy music from it. I just wonder about the kids. They have no money. Should they be denied music because of that? I understand that the finances are further complicated because many preamps don't include phono-stages now. But it was very informative what you said.

Those that use a good cartridge alignment gauge like the Dennison and tighten up their cartridge bolts are kidding themselves. I believe generally that the cartridge bolt that is closest to the outside of the record corresponds to the right speaker, as you face it. So, you don't completely tighten the bolts. Then you slightly move them one way or the other. When one speaker sounds likes it is in, you stop on that side of the cartridge. You then move, slightly the other side to equal what you got in the other speaker. With anti-skate, you have to realize that you are compensating for the increased pull that you get as you get closer to the end of the record. If it sounds better at the beginning of the record, you don't have enough anti-skate-for example.

This is for the financially challenged. Assuming you have a suspended-subchasis turntable, the spring on the right usually corresponds to what you hear on the right speaker(as you face it). The left spring to the left speaker. The spring towards the back corresponds to the middle of what you hear. As you bring the cartridge(on one side)towards the front, the treble will get brighter(or more prominent). If you get one side sounding better than the other side, stop! Then you try to get the other side to sound as good. Take your time! Go very slowly. It's no problem to keep things static, until you get an understanding of what has happened.

I know this off subject, but I have to mention it. Don't try to do something with any cartridge parameter that it wasn't meant to do. In other words, find out what it the best for each parameter and stick with that. If it doesn't provide the bass that you want, then it doesn't provide the bass that you want, period. It requires finding out what each cartridge parameter does what.

I just setup my Linn, nude Archiv, Ekos, Lingo, on the Mana table. There is no doubt in my mind that the most cost-effective approach to having music in the home is analog. That being said, it limits you to 1981 or earlier albums(some 1982's).

That guy who recommended Mapleshade's cd's might be on to something(They record everything in analog first, before putting it on cd.). First, I 'de like to thank Alex of APL Hi-Fi for proving to me that it isn't the digital playback mechanism that is the problem. He recorded directly from a turntable to a cd, and it sounded just like analog. I have an APL Hi-Fi, Denon 3910, and on the Jerry Garcia's Band, "After Midnight", analog would be hard-pressed to duplicate this cd. It was an original analog recording. I still think those people who don't have a proper turntable are crazy(one-dollar albums!). I don't listen to many lp's made after 1981(for good reasons), and I suspect that a similar attitude needs to be taken by cd-users. Some recordings can give you a headache! Let's get some real feedback on that.

Listen to Chazzbo. He has a lot to say, especially when it comes to jazz. I just want to mention something, but first, I want to appreciate what Tvad said about DVD-A releases from Classic records. Personally, I would stick to actual recordings recommended by people. In this vein, I totally recommend the Jerry Garcia Band "After Midnight" cd. Take a look at the price of ticket, when you get it. I would like some feedback on this cd. I don't believe I've steered you wrong. What is this hobby about?

I forgot to mention the criteria used to evaluate music. It is how much you get off on it(I have other ideas, such as what plays through your head. but these are experimental.).

Let's quit beating around the bush. Analog is far superior to digital.