2. misc-audio
  3. 153711-122613

Does Digital Try Too Hard?

Digital glare. A plague of digital sound playback systems. It seems the best comment a CD player or digital source can get is to sound “analog-like.” I’ve gone to great lengths to battle this in my CD-based 2-channel system but it’s never ending. My father, upon hearing my system for the first time (and at loud volumes), said this: “The treble isn’t offensive to my ears.” What a great compliment.

So what does digital do wrong? The tech specs tell us it’s far superior to vinyl or reel to reel. Does it try too hard? Where digital is trying to capture the micro details of complex passages, analog just “rounds it off” and says “good enough,” and it sounds good enough. Or does digital have some other issue in the chain - noise in the DAC chip, high frequency harmonics, or issues with the anti-aliasing filter? Does it have to do with the power supply?

There are studies that show people prefer the sound of vinyl, even if only by a small margin. That doesn’t quite add up when we consider digital’s dominant technical specifications. On paper, digital should win.

So what’s really going on here? Why doesn’t digital knock the socks off vinyl and why does there appear to be some issue with “digital glare” in digital systems.
128x128mkgus
asvjerry's avatar
asvjerry
4,252 posts
 
(....the riders glare @ each other, crops in hand.  Their mounts nervously tread and paw, awaiting....)

"They're at the Post! *short pause*the bell rings*

"They're Off and Running!" *hoof beats pound randomly hard, falling into the familiar semi-syncopated staccato rhythm of racing....*

Yep, @erik_squires ....they're at it, yet again....;)  No trophy, no winner's circle....just competition.....*mock sigh* 
terry9
2,209 posts
 
All you have to do is draw a sine wave. Then make 250 equally spaced marks on the x axis, starting with 0 and ending at 2pi. Use each mark as the step boundary of a step function. Just like elementary calculus.

Now calculate the mean square difference between that step function and the sine wave, and divide by the sine wave area - it’s about 5%. You may infer that 250 samples per waveform delivers about 5% distortion. Now, how many samples per 20KHz waveform?

That’s where your digital glare comes from - at least, part of it.
asvjerry's avatar
asvjerry
4,252 posts
 
@terry9 ....and that's where the algorithms have been dispatched to 'smooth' the 'lumps 'n bumps'.  DAC's have made tremendous inroads in that regard....*S*   No end in sight...or for D amps, either.

As processors speeds continue to accelerate (Moore's Law still seems to be in effect I've noticed), the 'glare' seems to be diminishing....

Pretty soon, the 'sunglasses' might become superfluous. ;)

Imagine that.

I'm not saying that analog will totally disappear, no..

I used to own an SL-10, which is the only turntable I can think of that could work in zero-G.  In fact, I could pick it up, turn it upside down...and it wouldn't miss a beat.

"First TT to Mars!" *L*
asvjerry's avatar
asvjerry
4,252 posts
 
...not too sure about vacuum tubes, though....
adameos
66 posts
 
Geoff Kait said “Digital can’t get out of its own way. It might be difficult to set up an experiment but if it can be done a direct comparison of a very good vinyl system to a very good CD system should reveal a few things about digital. To whit, digital exhibits:

1. loss of bass information and dynamics
2. unnatural midrange and high frequencies
3. unnaturalness of soundstage
4. two-dimensional sound
5. congealing of the sound across the board
6. Lack of sweetness and air”

This is exactly the way I hear it too.

“I’ll be the judge of that. If only you could hear what I’ve heard with my ears.”
👍 for the Rutger Hauer BladeRunner reference. 

 Thanks Geoff.
More to discover