When I do comparisons I adjust db levels. I have a meter to measure the db levels. I'm assuming most people who are audiophiles understand that this is a basic in comparing anything in the audio chain.
The muddy waters of Analogue vs. digital today
With new technology, everything is changing so fast it is hard to keep up with new recordings. I have had a turntable all of my audiophile life, although I admit I played mostly CDs for many years. It was only since I upgraded my analogue system to a certain degree in the mid-nineties, that I could hear that records sounded better than CDs. It wasn’t a very expensive upgrade, a used Rega 3 with glass platter, new Sumiko Bluepoint Special, and a floor demo ARC PH-3. Probably somewhere around $3K. Mid-90s remember.
Now my system is very upgraded and I can hear more differences between vinyl and streaming at high resolution. CDs have kind of been left in the dust. 44.1 resolution sounds kind of tinny and flat. I listen if that’s my only choice, but I can easily hear the difference. I credit myself with a decent ear after doing critial listening for 30+ years. My ear is not as good as most reviewers, but you'll understand why it’s good enough to write a forward to this thread.
I won’t go through the differences I hear between analogue and digital, because you’ve heard it all before. What I want to talk about is my confusion in this new recording landscape.
I had purchased Roberta Flack’s "First Take" when it came out and I’d kept the record for more than forty years when I realized it had really seen its better days. Basically, it was unlistenable, even after a few washes in the Degritter. I looked at near mint copies of the record and they were quite expensive. Then I saw that there was a new pressing for a reasonable price.
I was listening to the new pressing of "First Take" a few days ago when I realized it sounded overly compressed at the high end. I asked my new audiophile friend chatgpt if the record was pressed from an analogue source. Nope. I was basically listening to a digital recording pressed into vinyl. Chatgpt says that most records made after 1980 come from digital sources. So, I found a reasonablly priced orignal pressing of "First Take." My grandaugher in college can have the digital one.
Today I was playing a fairly new recording of Gustavo Dudamel and Yuja Wang playing Rachmaninoff’s Variations on a Theme by Paganini. I live in L.A. and have been lucky enough to see Dudamel live many times and Yuga Wang several times. It’s a beautiful recording, wide and deep and detailed and musical. I pronounced it the best classical recording I owned. But it was put out recently. So, I checked with my audiophile buddy chatgpt. The record is from a very high resolution digital source. Chatgpt says that digital can sound more analogue on vinyl because the engineers roll off the high end a bit.
So, now things are more than a bit confusing. Do I buy a recording from before the 80’s on expensive vinyl or might it actually sound better streaming at 192 kHz? If you listen to Patricia Barber’s "Clique" at 172 kHz, it sounds pretty good. So good, i have not bothered to go out and buy it on vinyl.
Does anyone else feel a similar confusion in this modern market, and do you have any suggestions for negotiating it?
- ...
- 130 posts total
There were several posts recently discussing sound quality differences between streaming vs analog. I know the topic cane up numerous times on these forums but I find it interesting that we are seeing these discussions more frequently now with audiophiles preferring the sound of vinyl and I was thinking what could possibly be the reason why. 1. Differences in levels of components - vinyl setup is a few notches above in quality compared to digital front ends in some systems 2. Streaming services that feature high resolution remastered albums that in a lot of cases unfortunately sound inferior to the originals. We all have our favorite recordings and most have been released either way before streaming was around and were recorded in pure analog. Or the albums that were recorded digitally and are now remastered with lower sound quality 3. Streaming changed our listening habits - we became impatient, we skip thru songs, we’re unable to enjoy the entire album because it’s too convenient to jump to the next selection and so we don’t allow ourselves to get into the music. 5. The tone and the overall sonic characteristics of vinyl records is more to our liking than the super clean, and at times sterile and anemic delivery of music by the digital components and streaming itself. Lack of musical engagement in listeners 6. Selection of new releases made available on very high quality vinyl mastered in full analog with a catalog big enough for most of us to purchase our favorite music that sounds amazing on the high quality playback equipment in our systems. And finally the 7. Ritual of playing a vinyl record that requires involvement (cleaning the record, making sure everything is perfect, cleaning the stylus and dropping the needle. In addition, playing albums you purchased when you were young that trigger certain memories, a kind of a throwback we all enjoy. This part is almost completely missing with streaming. That’s my theory. I’m sure I missed a few aspects that others can add. And I may completely be off track here. Oh and most of whatbI described applies to playing our CD collection. |
Discogs has been doing this for decades now and list every remastering that's been done since a recording's first release no matter how old it is. Only requires your literary and basic computer skills to search out anything you want to know. Do you really think that a digital version of an analog recording is going to have anything in common with an all analog version of it? Nothing about the mastering process is going to be the same though the producers of the digital reissue may strive to achieve a listening experience that the music buying public is accustomed to, a comparison just isn't fair in any way. As for digital playback as in the case of CD or SACD it's only as good as the equipment you play it back on irrespective of how much you spend on your digital front end since a properly chosen CD/SACD player, transport, DAC and considering the system it's going to be matched to can yield outstanding results. In my opinion there has never been anything wrong with the 16-bit format only it's implementation on certain recordings or remasters and for the most part I find it as enjoyable as SACD or even vinyl though I'm inexorably attracted to the tactility of vinyl for which I have the most titles and spend most of my time listening to given the choice.
|
I don’t really get the agonizing about analog vs digital any more. It’s unreasonable to make it an either or context. Both can produce excellent results if done well. Some digital remasters of analog recordings aren’t as good as the original, but the reverse is certainly true as well. It’s reasonable to have the capability to play both and make your decision on a case by case basis |
@mahler123 I don’t know if anyone’s agonizing over it here. I’m definitely enjoying both formats. I’m really excited about the fact that more pure analog vinyl is being produced right now than even a year or two ago. I also hate the limited/numbered editions. But thankfully in some cases when the numbered editions ate sold out they still want to continue to make money and keep producing these records as regular versions. Some of these are killer sounding albums. So yeah I actually think now is a good time to get back into vinyl. |
- 130 posts total