I think he just explained "synergy"....That is a good piece.
It Can't Be Explained Better
I just read this latest post from Dave Chesky at Audiophile Society, and I must share it, as nothing I've read has better explained the phenomenon that may be behind the preference for vinyl playback so many of us have...
|
|
- ...
- 49 posts total
From a different article, a different view or explanation.
Many argue that vinyl is warmer and more natural, while digital sounds cold. Part of this belief comes from mastering differences. Vinyl releases are often cut from versions with less compression. So, they may sound more dynamic than heavily limited CDs. Vinyl playback also introduces harmonic distortion and a slight high-frequency roll-off that some listeners enjoy. Technically, though, digital has the edge. A CD delivers ~96 dB of dynamic range and captures frequencies up to ~22 kHz. Meanwhile, vinyl typically lands in the mid-50s to mid-60s dB before surface noise takes over, and stereo separation averages around 25–35 dB at 1 kHz. Yes, cartridges and cutting lathes can trace content past 20 kHz under ideal conditions. But real playback usually involves limits from tracing distortion and RIAA equalization. Analog is continuous in theory, but resolution is bounded by groove noise, stylus wear, and other mechanical limits. Digital, by contrast, captures the audible range cleanly and with lower noise. Liking vinyl is a valid preference, but it’s not the same as greater accuracy. |
In this polarised world we live in, some fanatics feel compelled to jump into any discussion of the magical sound of vinyl to declare streaming the victor in some imaginary war of the formats. What utter nonsense. In truth, they do different things and we need both. Not everyone can afford both, but anyone who deliberately limits themselves to one is denying themselves the advantages of the other. It is also completely off topic. |
- 49 posts total

