2. misc-audio
  3. 162740-122613

Does Anyone Think CD is Better Than Vinyl/Analog?

I am curious to know if anyone thinks the CD format (and I suppose that could include digital altogether) sounds better than vinyl and other analog formats. Who here has gone really far down both paths and can make a valid comparison? So far, I have only gone very far down the CD path and I just keep getting blown away by what the medium is capable of! I haven’t hit a wall yet. It is extremely dependent on proper setup, synergy and source material. Once you start getting those things right, the equipment gets out of the way and it can sound more fantastic than you can imagine! It’s led me to start developing a philosophy that goes something like this: Digital IS “perfect sound forever”; it’s what we do to the signal between the surface of the CD and the speaker cone that compromises it.” 
So I suppose what I’m asking for is stories from people who have explored both mediums in depth and came to the conclusion that CD has the most potential (or vice versa - that’s helpful too). And I don’t simply mean you’ve spent a lot of money on a CD player. I mean you’ve tinkered and tweaked and done actual “research in the lab,” and came back with a deep understanding of the medium and can share those experiences with others.

In my experience, the three most important things to get right are to find a good CD player (and good rarely means most expensive in my experience) and then give it clean power. In my case, I have modified my CD player to run off battery power with DC-DC regulators. The last thing that must be done right is the preamp. It’s the difference between “sounds pretty good” and “sounds dynamic and realistic.”
128x128mkgus
Ag insider logo xs@2x
jallan
254 posts
 
Just barely touched on here, but most newer (since the early 80’s) lp’s were mixed from digital recordings. I have done a lot of comparisons over the years. Digital recordings on lp’s have the “vinyl” sound just like those analogue sourced. Thus, the media and playback itself imparts much of the smooth, tonally warm sound. Which sounded best? As I moved up the developmental food gain, from crappy 14 bit early cd’s played on the highly colored but musical Adcom CD player, to the warm, analogue sounding CAL Alpha/Delta RTR player, to the more analytical but more detailed Sony5400 ES SACD player with high-res recordings, analogue records began to be approached or exceeded where I had both digital and analogue media. 
The game changer for me was the remastering or initial recording to much higher quality digital high resolution with fewer artifacts, and most importantly the acquisition of a top notch DAC (Schiit Yggdrasil). Now, everything is better with the high res digital recordings, including the sense of space and air. The new DACs are really great. Yes, I am a ladder RTR guy, thanks Mike Moffat. I also note that entry level phono cartridges are in the thousands of dollars for highly fragile and twiddly equipment that is short-lived. The prices seem insane. I miss my $81 Sonus Blues ($375 or so in today’s dollars for SOA in a phono cartridge). The relative value of a Schiit Yggdrasil or Mytek or Chord DAC seems much higher.
Post removed 
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 


Later recordings that were done using digital, CD wins out.

Early recordings that were done analogue vinyl wins out, "until" I put a left to right bleed switch on the output of my CDP/dac that brings the channel separation back down to 30db at best like vinyl, then cd wins out because of no surface noise.

When you "monoize" (down to 30db channel separation) early cd’s like I do with the switch, with early left right ping pong cd’s (Beatles, Beach Boys etc) it gives more body to the bass and mids and a more solid centre image like the vinyl does.

Cheers George
ruraltraumasurgeon's avatar
ruraltraumasurgeon
29 posts
 
Ken Kessler wrote a piece in a recent HiFi+ about the demographics of those of us who prefer spinning CDs and SACDs. We are baby boomers who like physical media and will continue to buy higher quality reissues of CDs that we already own (think of the latest 50th-anniversary releases by the Beatles and Dead). But then, I also prefer reading (and writing) heavy medical books to reading the same content in a Nook or Kindle.
We will be gone soon and the streaming generations can take over.
clearthinker's avatar
clearthinker
1,582 posts
 
It must be recognised that in 1980 specific storage capacity was orders of magnitude less than it is today. The Red Book CD spec was practical, not theoretical.  It was based on the maximum amount of data that would fit on the chosen silver disc, the Nyquist equation and an 80 minute run-time to allow Beethoven's Ninth to fit. This gave rise to the 16 bit 44.1k standard. Not chosen at all for sound quality, just what would fit. No wonder it can sound very poor, and universally did in 1983, before any of the shortcomings  below started to be addressed.

After 40 years trying, it would appear clock, quantisation, dither, AD converter problems etc  will never be solved.  That means all digital necessarily suffers from false timing, rhythm, dwell artifacts and the widely recognised 'unreal' sound, whatever the information density.  But, properly implemented, more density certainly helps hide these.

But for the CD: 'Perfect sound for ever'?  No.


More to discover