Which is more accurate: digital or vinyl?


More accurate, mind you, not better sounding. We've all agreed on that one already, right?

How about more precise?

Any metrics or quantitative facts to support your case is appreciated.
128x128mapman
"They sell all the nice audio toys and retreat in defeat to a simple integrated amp system”

Hey! I did not retreat in defeat to my simple integrated amp system. :)
RE***And yes, I still say that if you really cannot hear the HUGE differences between the live and the recorded in your own above example, or you truly think they are negligible and unimportant, then I truly pity you, as you are clearly missing a very great deal of what the musicians are trying to communicate to you. ***

You shouldn't pity me, you should say, wow, he must have a well put together system!

Also, i'm not intimidated by your credentials as to why you think you can hear better than me. And i'm quite confident you THINK can hear BETTER than me... OR ...that you can LISTEN better than i can. Hogwash.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist(or a professional musician(i've heard this a thousand times)) to know what a unamplified....harmonica, acoustic guitar, trumpet, trombone or violin sound like...played alone in a quiet room. It's immediately self apparent when you are.

The argument goes...i'm a professional musician, i'm a recording engineer, i go to live concerts twice a week THEREFORE because you don't have the same degree of exposure you can't know what real instruments sound like, therefore your experience must be rejected. Hogwash.

The sound of the above name instruments heard alone/live in a quiet room is easily discernible and their attributes/characteristics are self evident.

For the last 6 years i have been vigorously LISTENING and comparing systems, both my own and other audiophiles systems[this in itself has been a kind of training], previous to that i have lived in this world for many more decades and have heard and have played instruments all my life so if you would be so kind, please do not tell me i don't know how to listen or that your ear is better than mine cause you're a pro!

While i attest that the differences between the live event of the nirvana unplugged concert and the norah jones track i mentioned in a previous post and my stereo playback are negligible i also now attest, that for past 5 years i have ALMOST never or extremely rarely have heard a system sound like the actual event. Therefore, i DO have the ear/discernment to reject stereo reproduction that does not mimic or encapsulate the actual event.

If i didn't, how could i say all those years and to almost all the systems i have heard, own included..."this sounds fake"..."this parameter is wrong or that parameter is wrong?"

And...i can attest to the fact that 95 percent of my home playback does not mimic reality, nor have 99 percent of the systems i have heard. One other system i did hear it mimic reality on a couple tracks too. It was the tape of the 'star wars' theme.

I am a timbre and dynamics 'freak'. That is, timbre...(an instruments inherent signature pertaining to ...what the materials utilized in its construction and how those materials vibrate/sound as they push air when played)are my highest audiophile value with dynamics as it's close handmaiden.

So, if the timbres during my stereo playback or anybodies stereo's playback are off, to my mind, the music...in this respect loses its ability to fool you into thinking you are listening to a live instrument.

Also, you can go and hear and be exposed to many system's which you think are the best that is possible but still take away the experience that it did not imitate the live event, regardless of whether the system was ultra extreme expensive.

Dollars spent ...doesn't always translate to..."this is the best possible".

There are alot of expensive systems that have something amiss but tired audiophiles don't know where to go from there or don't know how to pinpoint the problem, except to throw more money at the problem.

What i'm trying to say is...while it is possible these great systems you have been exposed to had limited synergy between the components so that there was some parameter that could not fool you into thinking this sounds like live instruments therefore you believe it impossible that it can be so. I really want to labour this point since, i have been sorely disappointed by hifi dealers rooms and other audiophiles systems, over and over and over. I'm pretty picky and fussy and i keep it to myself but some of these hifi dealers rooms sound poor.

Secondly,

RE***I truly pity you, as you are clearly missing a very great deal of what the musicians are trying to communicate to you. ***

No, i'm not.

I'm getting alot of what they are trying to communicate with my system, ESPECIALLY on the specific musical pieces i've named already several times ....because my system can mimic the fabric that makes music music.

RE***I truly pity you, as you are clearly missing a very great deal of what the musicians are trying to communicate to you. ***

Do you know what i'd get out of seeing patti smith live unplugged? Do you know what i'd get hearing patti smith on my stereo? Will i 'get' the deep emotion she is trying to communicate because i hear her voice live and her guitar live?

No i wont, cause i'm not interested in patti smith. So, i don't get much emotion from patti recorded OR live. Which is to say...that music is MORE than whether or not you hear timbres reproduced accurately or not. I guess what i'm saying is that there are other things, other than just dynamics and correct timbres that evoke a emotional response in music.

for example...the words, the arrangements, how loud, or how soft something is played, how fast or slow, how a person uses their voice, how it all sounds when its happening together...other things too i'm sure.

I love music and timbres produced by a stereo that mimicks reality on SOME DAYS is just a luxury, not a necessity.

ON SOME DAYS...i'm just as content listening to my favorite music on my 12 dollar getto blaster that plays, radio, tape and cd all in one unit!!! as much as i would on my 40,000 dollar system because music is more than just timbre and dynamic response.

Emotions can be evoked by a memory we attach to a song, by the words, all kinds of things. Timbre is not the single channel alone to emotional connection. As i said patti smith 'LIVE!'even with the genuine clash of a real cymbal is just ho hum for me i won't get what she is trying to convey SIMPLY BECAUSE it is live.

So, if someone thinks 100 percent accurate timbre and dynamics is a necessary prerequisite to connecting emotionally and that 55.2 percent correct timbre is insufficient to convey musical emotion then i would have to disagree with them. There is so much more going on between a piece of music and the listener irregardless of whether not it is faithfully reproduced.

Many times the HIGHEST percentage of emotional connection is made APART from either dynamics or correct timbres and can be attributed to some other parameter. Other things are going in the human psyche that while listening to music we are unaware of.

Anyways...I have a good ear, i know what real instruments sound like, i am just as good a listener out there as anyone, i am picky about timbres, i have not heard correct reproduced timbres for years and was able to discern that they were in fact 'off' and all i can share is my experience ,whether people want to believe them or not, When my system has warmed for at least an hour and a half , with certain well recorded tracks and certain recorded sparse live musical events recorded on dvd, watching and listening to those and distinguishing those from actual live events (from a sonic perspective only)becomes extremely difficult.
RE***I still say that if you really cannot hear the HUGE differences between the live and the recorded in your own above example....****

Learsfool, I have to say...if you still hear a HUGE difference between well recorded music and your stereo, you should take a second look at your system.

Kind regards,

.
Vertigo - I think most people reading this thread will understand that you have misrepresented my comments. It seemed to me that you were clearly implying that I and everyone else disagreeing with you don't know what we are talking about, that our ears must be inferior, and that we haven't ever heard a really good system, and I was merely responding to that by informing you of my experience. My irritation at your attitude certainly was obvious in my post, but that was all it was. I know I am not the best writer, especially late at night when I am tired and irritated, but I assure you I would never resort to the type of argument you are now trying to attribute to me, which I definitely agree is hogwash, and I meant nothing of the sort. I think my main point was and is obvious enough, and needs no further elaboration.

If I am mistaken in your attitude, and my irritation is misplaced, I do apologize. I leave you the field, since further discussion seems pointless, and I sincerely wish you joy with your listening.
I agree if there is a huge difference between live and home listening in general, and it is something taht bothers you, there is probably something that can be done to close the gap.

I had that problem up until about two years ago. Since then it has become a non issue. The solution: keep tweaking until you get it right......