Does analogue ultimately beat digital?

[nostromo]

CD was slated by many at the time for lousy sound quality but now the early chips and transport mechs seem to be highly regarded. Funny old business really.

Yes, this is a strange phenomenon. A few years ago (~5) I listened to a Karik and a Genki... Boy were they bad. Very shrill. I only tried them because I had fond memories of the Karik from soon after it was first released (early 90s?).

 

[chartz]

….nope. I’ve done the comparisons….digital is unmistakably inferior to vinyl that’s cut from the same digital master; to either CD or the 44.1k stream. I realise that some music lovers just can’t hear it…baffles me, it really does.

This doesn’t make sense, does it?
What we enjoy so much has to be a travesty of the original recording, not the absolute truth. A trick.

Many people these days swear that records are better than digital but they do listen to digital recordings cut to vinyl. The other day I was listening to London Grammar’s first album (not the electro stuff, the real music) and I could swear that the LP was so much better than the CD. A digital remaster of KOB on vinyl also sounds astoundingly better than the CD. And so on and so forth…

Thing is, vinyl transfers of these recordings cannot possibly be better than the master tapes that CD or streaming actually very faithfully render. This is an uncanny phenomenon.

BUT… some vinyl transfers sound exactly the same as the CDs – no, the digital recordings - they come from, which is even more disturbing perhaps, but which should be the norm. An example? That old Supertramp Crime of the Century album.

Now pure analogue records played on a good turntable can sound extraordinary I agree… how can there be so much information in a piece of pressed plastic originally cut on an antique lathe I’ve always wondered. I know it’s an illusion, but whatever.

 

[Octavian]

It genuinely doesn’t matter whether you believe me or not, I can’t lend you my ears to progress this discussion! Lol!! What I hear and you hear, are subjective. These posts can never move on because of that inevitability.
.

So in the end you are only wondering why many others do not share your personal preferences?

 

[Del monaco]

This doesn’t make sense, does it?
What we enjoy so much has to be a travesty of the original recording, not the absolute truth. A trick.

Many people these days swear that records are better than digital but they do listen to digital recordings cut to vinyl. The other day I was listening to London Grammar’s first album (not the electro stuff, the real music) and I could swear that the LP was so much better than the CD. A digital remaster of KOB on vinyl also sounds astoundingly better than the CD. And so on and so forth…

Thing is, vinyl transfers of these recordings cannot possibly be better than the master tapes that CD or streaming actually very faithfully render. This is an uncanny phenomenon.

BUT… some vinyl transfers sound exactly the same as the CDs – no, the digital recordings - they come from, which is even more disturbing perhaps, but which should be the norm. An example? That old Supertramp Crime of the Century album.

Now pure analogue records played on a good turntable can sound extraordinary I agree… how can there be so much information in a piece of pressed plastic originally cut on an antique lathe I’ve always wondered. I know it’s an illusion, but whatever.

The old Supertramp album can sound extraordinary, especially the intro to the first track.

 

[Hazelberry]

Not this time.

Damn, it’s a painful decision! Whether to purchase two LPs at 59 NZD & $49 respectively vs a FLAC download & CD at $10 & $20 respectively? Music with large format artwork & tradition vs, well, just music that sounds perfectly fine anyway?

When one has just had to spend $800 on ones car & ~7.5% inflation rules the economy, overall having just the music wins ofc :/

 

[sq225917]

Just nick em online....

 

[chartz]

But do try Spotify and Apple Music first, because you might just be surprised. Listening with no bias is important here.

 

[Paul Hindle]

The old Supertramp album can sound extraordinary

I had a Supertramp album on vinyl once. Can’t remember which one but it was the only vinyl lp I ever threw in the bin. Can’t even remember why. Probably off topic but just thought it was interesting.

 

[Del monaco]

I had a Supertramp album on vinyl once. Can’t remember which one but it was the only vinyl lp I ever threw in the bin. Can’t even remember why. Probably off topic but just thought it was interesting.

It’s great on Qobuz.

 

[ff1d1l]

Surely in premium streaming it would be quite possible to encode in the metadata a track's original position on an LP?
Then, according to its position relative to the label, distortion, compression and curtailed bass could be applied, exactly mimicking vinyl. A function mimicking fluff buildup on the needle as the track plays might be a popular option too.

True equality between digital and vinyl should not be beyond the reach of the relentless march of technological advances!

 

[JoeJoe]

So in the end you are only wondering why many others do not share your personal preferences?

Yes, I’m genuinely confused why so many can’t hear what I hear with all digital and this is regardless of any system or bit-rate. There’s a chart of digital awfulness though…

Dab = woeful
MQA = what’s going on there? Doesn’t sound like the original release at all!
CD = Poor
Streaming at 44.1 = Better than CD for some reason….
SACD = OK
Hi-Res streaming = Best of digital, but still nowhere as natural sounding as vinyl

I can hear it’s digital in the same way I can instantly tell if a record player is minutely off-pitch. So, for me discussions on the kit I own or kit I’ve auditioned is not the issue but appreciate it is for many a digital lover.

 

[Del monaco]

Yes, I’m genuinely confused why so many can’t hear what I hear with all digital and this is regardless of any system or bit-rate. There’s a chart of digital awfulness though…

Dab = woeful
MQA = what’s going on there? Doesn’t sound like the original release at all!
CD = Poor
Streaming at 44.1 = Better than CD for some reason….
SACD = OK
Hi-Res streaming = Best of digital, but still nowhere as natural sounding as vinyl

I can hear it’s digital in the same way I can instantly tell if a record player is minutely off-pitch. So, for me discussions on the kit I own or kit I’ve auditioned is not the issue but appreciate it is for many a digital lover.

DAB plus can be fine( on my Yammy it’s very listenable)
MQA-I don’t see or hear the fuss really
CD-can be great on the right machine
Streaming- mixed bag really in all resolutions but can sound great
SACD-found it bright sounding
Vinyl-Like cd, can be great

 

[Octavian]

Yes, I’m genuinely confused why so many can’t hear what I hear with all digital and this is regardless of any system or bit-rate.

It is entirely possible that others can hear the very things you think you are hearing. You just do not like the same things others like. I usually prefer chocolate ice cream over plain vanilla. But I am not suggesting vanilla has some awful flaw which only I am able to taste.

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

I

However, music exists in the analogue domain, so vinyl, fm radio and cassette are off to a flying start to begin with…
.

Nope. Basic error to assume "music exists in the analogue domain".

In reality the air is made of molecules and it is the statistical 'dithering' of them banging against each other that our mics use to generate patterns of quantised electrons to jiggle about, etc. The energies involved are quantised, etc.

Reality is neither 'analogue' nor 'digital'. They are just convenient models we adopt for what we do about it.

The label is not the reality. A painting of a pipe isn't a pipe, no matter if the artist used a brush or a spray-can.

 

[JoeJoe]

…..We are talking formats here and not equipment really. It’s a bit like VHS versus Betamax. Betamax was far superior but lost the mass-market battle. Analogue is way better than digital but is the niche format these days.

 

[JoeJoe]

Nope. Basic error to assume "music exists in the analogue domain".

In reality the air is made of molecules and it is the statistical 'dithering' of them banging against each other that our mics use to generate patterns of quantised electrons to jiggle about, etc. The energies involved are quantised, etc.

Reality is neither 'analogue' nor 'digital'. They are just convenient models we adopt for what we do about it.

The label is not the reality. A painting of a pipe isn't a pipe, no matter if the artist used a brush or a spray-can.

…conversion from analogue into 1’s and 0’s has to take place and then from 1’s and 0’s back to analogue. Looses all that subtlety and naturalness in the process……what a waste of good music.

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

I can hear it’s digital in the same way I can instantly tell if a record player is minutely off-pitch. So, for me discussions on the kit I own or kit I’ve auditioned is not the issue but appreciate it is for many a digital lover.

You can easily recognise pitch variations due to wow/flutter. And can recognise that as a defect in the LP/replay system.

But if you hear a difference in, say, the stereo image due to cartridge effects, or a change in dynamic response or frequency response due to an LP cut to fit easily, you may prefer that and then criticise a CD because it sounds worse to you. The point here is that it is routine-to-invitable that LP cutting and replay tends to have these sorts of mechanisms that alter the result. If you prefer the alterations, fine. But not a reason to assume CD is at fault as a system for not adding them.

Similarly if you can hear above 22kHz you may miss any HF distortion products there, just as you might miss musical components there.

So the difference can be due to your preferring the changes, or having a setup that makes other changes to suit them - but then not CD because it corrects for absent changes in the source.

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

…conversion from analogue into 1’s and 0’s has to take place and then from 1’s and 0’s back to analogue. Looses all that subtlety and naturalness in the process……what a waste of good music.

What a curious assertion of faith.

Shame you have so much difficulty enjoying what others enjoy. But, fair enough, choose what you prefer, inc your belief system.

 

[JoeJoe]

What a curious assertion of faith.

Shame you have so much difficulty enjoying what others enjoy. But, fair enough, choose what you prefer, inc your belief system.

…I do listen to digital, it’s just not very good. Doesn’t stop me enjoying BBC Sounds or Tidal. But, I’d always take analogue when there’s a choice between the two.

 

[JensenHealey]

Do not imagine that FM is an analogue source to listen too. There is plenty of digital conversion long before it gets anywhere near the transmitter!