My digital front end outdoes my analog.....


For the first time ever my analog setup is being outdone by my digital front end. The equipment: digital-MF Trivista SACD
analog-Thorens TD-125 w/Rabco SL8E linear tracking arm/Grado Master reference (4.0mv) YS Audio Concerto plus with Telefunken smooth plate 12AX7's. The sound: Overall fairly similar with that usual superior analog HF response. The image and seperation are way better on the CDP, this is my biggest issue. Better, but less so, are bass response and dynamics on the CDP as well. I love vinyl and always have and will. The tonearm is set up great and the thing tracks perfect. VTA perfect. I have it only two feet from the left speaker and it doesn't even think of feeding back. I can jump on the floor and the woofers don't move so it is so well isolated. The table/arm seem fine. Here are problems I see:
1)Lower end phono pre (so what do I need to spend)
2)Rewire TT from cart to interconnect as the tonearm is 30 years old
3)As a passive line stage user I need a very low Z ballsier phono stage. The current unit is 54db gain with an output impedence of 1000 ohms. The Trivista CDP's output impedence is 50 ohms (this could be the bass issue since I use a passive linestage)

Vinyl will never have the place for me it once did since so few new releases are on LP. I have most of the vinyl and out of print vinyl not on or never released on CD that I desire to own (based on what I like)
I do love playing with vinyl and shopping and finding it as well. Thoughts welcome-thanks in advance

ET
electroid
I gather from this thread that if Digital sounds as good as Analog, then the Analog system must have a problem. (Analog inherently should sound better...only a lot more expensive right?)

Perhaps my analog system in 1985 was not very good when I made the switch (Thorens, grado MM, belt drive etc. no more than $500 for the source)....although the Walkman D-50 CDP (1984 model) I compared it to was not exactly the cats whiskers either....but the difference, although subtle, was enough to give CD the edge (S/N and LF response seemed slightly better with the CD to me even if the ultra HF had a harshness that I was not used to hearing on vinyl. Not bad, IMHO, considering the recording industry and equipment designs of that period were all intended to make Analog sound optimum) I used the Jackson Thriller and Dire Straits Brother in Arms vinyl/CD to compare and that was enough for me to make the switch. ( I deliberately chose to compare recent recordings as I did not think the conversion of old mix/masters made specifically to sound great on Vinyl would necessarily do justice to a new medium like CD. )

Over the last 20 years I believe the recording industry has improved a lot on how to get good sound from CD's to play on systems that give optimum sound for CD's....much as the industry had already learnt (in the 70's) how to make vinyl sound optimum. Frankly, I could live with either but CD is significantly more convenient and robust...no more brushes, fluids, isolation pads, pre-preamps, clicks and pops etc.
ok so if you really feel that you could get great analog, table, tone arm, phono stage, cartridge all for the same investment it would take to get a pretty good digital wich can be had for a grand or so, then you know something I dont.
Analog is an imperfect approximation, but it's a real approximation, vulnerable, and messy -- just like life. Digital isn't real, it's an encryption (code) for something real. It's an approximation too, but it's an approximation of an approximation. It's clean, repeatable, precise and pristine -- not at all like real life, and you know it when you hear it. It's a little like the old Technicolor -- just a little TOO REAL to be real.

There's no point comparing the two. With analog you get "real" but "imperfect." With digital, you get "perfect" but "artificial."

.
My Grado is 4.0 mv (its a wood body hi output master) as the tag that came with it states. It does not overdrive the Concerto. In fact as my original post states fidelity overall is similar w/ a slight edge in the HF area going to the vinyl rig. The CDP output is higher and has a bit more slam (better dynamics and bass which I attribute to its 50 ohm output impedence and slightly higher output overall) I would be happy if the image and soundstage were even almost as good, it's not. I think I will rewire the Rabco and bypass its tonearm connector as another Rabco owner did w/good result and then try better phono stages. I used someone I know and respect to help with the math between cart out & phono stage gain to get my desired final out before my passive linestage. He suggested 60db gain, I came close at 54 because I couldn't find something with 60 (other than a Wright) that I could afford at the time. Thanks again to everyone. I would like to add this was never meant to be a vinyl vs digital thread, rather I was soliciting tips for improved results with my vinyl setup. Clearly there is a gap in total retail dollars between the two in my system. I still haven't heard anyone suggest a particular phono stage with high gain/output for me to try.
ET, don't take my word for it; just look up the MC vs. MM gain specifications for any preamp with a built-in MM/MC phono section, or any phono preamp that accomodates both MM and MC, and you will see what I'm talking about.

All the ones I can find specify around 34dB for cartridges with outputs of 2.0 mV or higher (MM), ~58dB for (MC) cartridges between 0.2mV-0.6mV, and 68dB for the really low output MC cartridges <0.2mV. FWIW