Article: The Revenge of Analog: An Editorial and Review

[semente]

R,

I think it quite possible you may have become wrapped up with a case CA Audionervosa.

All the crazy talk and claims that go on here on the sound of everything from optical drives, hard drives, power supplies, data cables, SATA cables, USB widgets, grounding boxes that contain a scoop of Dracula's coffin dirt , etc, etc, etc.

It can get to your brain and infect it with bias that may be totally delusional.

I'm not being confrontational or sarcastic, I'm being friendly and very serious here.

Maybe it's time to take some steps back, break away for a while.

Then gather round some non-audio friends to help you run a series of blind listening tests and gauge a few of these things that are causing you to experience "an unpleasant and expensive can of worms."

It shouldn't be that way and IMHO most likely isn't. Something else is at play here causing you this audio trauma.

Good luck,

Sal

Don't get me wrong, I am finally enjoying the results but it took a while before I got CD quality out of my laptop (though I admit that I didn't put much money in any of the DACs)...

I like plug'n'play stuff, tweaking and box-swapping are not my thing.

 

R

[gmgraves]

Here's another class of very cool little projects involving minimal wood-working: the open-baffle speaker:

 

 

This looks suspiciously like a pair of speakers that Nelson Pass built for the "Burning Amp" expo in San Francisco several years ago! They actually sounded surprisingly good with only one 8" driver with whizzer cone (like above).

[YashN]

This looks suspiciously like a pair of speakers that Nelson Pass built for the "Burning Amp" expo in San Francisco several years ago! They actually sounded surprisingly good with only one 8" driver with whizzer cone (like above).

 

It could well be: I just found a simple-looking build from Google Images to illustrate the point. I've seen some interesting Horns with similar-looking full-rangers by Nelson.

[gmgraves]

That's a good question. There used to be a digital back available for both 4 X 5 and 8 X 10 view cameras. It used, if I'm not mistaken, a scanning system rather than a array, and was therefore only good for landscapes and other still-life photography. It came with it's own laptop and software (the files were raw and humongous) I have not seen any reference to the system in a number of years, so I can't say whether it's still available. Again, if memory serves, it might have been sold under the brand name "Leaf", but don't quote me.

 

More information on Digital view camera "backs". They're made by a company called "Better Light". They are scanning digital (they work like desktop scanner, so no wildlife (well, maybe plants) or portraits are possible). The 4 X 5 back gives 6000 X 8000 pixel pictures and starts at around US$13K. The 8 X 10 back gives 8000 X 16000 pixel images and costs more than US$20K. A Mac or Windows PC with USB2 or betters required to capture the images. The individual files are quite large (48 and 96 megapixels RAW respectively).

[Sal1950]

That's a good question. There used to be a digital back available for both 4 X 5 and 8 X 10 view cameras. It used, if I'm not mistaken, a scanning system rather than a array, and was therefore only good for landscapes and other still-life photography. It came with it's own laptop and software (the files were raw and humongous) I have not seen any reference to the system in a number of years, so I can't say whether it's still available. Again, if memory serves, it might have been sold under the brand name "Leaf", but don't quote me.

 

More information on Digital view camera "backs". They're made by a company called "Better Light". They are scanning digital (they work like desktop scanner, so no wildlife (well, maybe plants) or portraits are possible). The 4 X 5 back gives 6000 X 8000 pixel pictures and starts at around US$13K. The 8 X 10 back gives 8000 X 16000 pixel images and costs more than US$20K. A Mac or Windows PC with USB2 or betters required to capture the images. The individual files are quite large (48 and 96 megapixels RAW respectively).

 

I take it then that this could be a photographic archiving process capable of some level microscopic magnification?

[gmgraves]

 

I take it then that this could be a photographic archiving process capable of some level microscopic magnification?

 

I guess it could be used on anything that takes a standard 4 X 5 or 8 X 10 film holders. That includes some microscopes and I'm sure large astronomical telescopes already use this system, or something similar.

[Jack Pot]

aaa

[JoeWhip]

I prefer to read paper books because I experience less eye strain than with something like my iPad or a Kindle. It has nothing to do with the feel of paper in my hands or anything like that. As for music, I listen to just that, the music. I get no added joy out of the paper packing or lack thereof that comes with it. It is the aural experience which is the only thing that matters to me, the beauty and emotional impact of the sound. I find that digital and vinyl can both sound great. While I have a very nice TT system, I listen mostly to digital. It is way more convenience and to these ears, just sounds better, more like the real thing and I go to plenty of concerts each year. I find digital files to be plenty real, even if they come down the internet pipe. Just my $.02.

[Lionel]

Loved to read your story! Hope you don't mind I've qouted you on my Facebook, along with a picture of what I was doing...

[daiku]

Another analog to that so far discussed(excuse the pun) is in the world of music synthesis. There is a huge explosion of analog synthesizers being produced in the last few years, and increasing at an accelerated pace. As a guitarist, I have noted this with interest. Despite the tremendous capabilities of software based synthesis, many people are buying new hardware analog synthesizers, because they aren't feeling inspired by sitting behind the computer screen making adjustments with a mouse. Physical devices you can touch with knobs and switches and transistors, etc. are making a comeback. Korg has released a series of analog synths, including the revival of the Arp Odyssey, and a number of others. Not just happening with music reproduction, but with production as well.

 

As a 25 year software development professional, despite being involved in a number of very interesting and well received commercial products, I always found the limited shelf life bothered me. I built a substantial woodworking shop, and have produced items that I can touch and see, and will survive me for generations. Something very satisfying in that as well.

[ford2075]

To me, the essence of music is performance, live performance, and connection between people. All the artifacts like vinyl, tapes and CD are substitutes for the original performance. The loss of material contact that comes with digital is indeed the second loss, after having lost the original performance. Though, one way to look at it is that the loss of the substitute can instead enable a more direct connection with the original performance, by moving the focus away from the substitute.

 

There's been great album art though, and some artists have reached a greater sense of achievement by putting some of their focus on album art... but this is not music...

[Window Pane Lizard]

Ahhh...'The good old days (of analog)...when botulism was a sauce.'

(George Carlin)

[fritzg]

Maybe it's because I grew up in an analog world that I don't value vinyl or printed books so much. I really like the convenience etc of digital versions and prefer them. If I was younger I'd probably be one of those kids searching for vinyl and buying printed books.

I grew up in an analog world, too. Use to develop my own film and worked as a typesetter at a major newspaper in college. I have recently rediscovered vinyl and joined the Vinyl Me Please club. I like the curation aspect. I am exposed to a lot of new and/or unfamiliar music by them. Some I buy on vinyl and some I listen to in TIDAL.

 

Today I bought tickets to hear Bonnie Raitt this summer and on my lunch hour walked down to one of three independent record (read vinyl) shops near my work and bought two used 1970s Bonnie Raitt lps for $4.99 each to bring home to surprise my wife. She loved it. Playing the same albums in Roon just wouldn't have been the same.

 

We use both. I've made a commitment to not have more than 100 lps at a time. We'll see how that works out. But right now my new purchases are lps, not digital hi-res. (Though TIDAL is used an awful lot and we still listen to the 20K+ albums I have in Roon.)

[semente]

Another analog to that so far discussed(excuse the pun) is in the world of music synthesis. There is a huge explosion of analog synthesizers being produced in the last few years, and increasing at an accelerated pace. As a guitarist, I have noted this with interest. Despite the tremendous capabilities of software based synthesis, many people are buying new hardware analog synthesizers, because they aren't feeling inspired by sitting behind the computer screen making adjustments with a mouse. Physical devices you can touch with knobs and switches and transistors, etc. are making a comeback. Korg has released a series of analog synths, including the revival of the Arp Odyssey, and a number of others. Not just happening with music reproduction, but with production as well.

 

As a 25 year software development professional, despite being involved in a number of very interesting and well received commercial products, I always found the limited shelf life bothered me. I built a substantial woodworking shop, and have produced items that I can touch and see, and will survive me for generations. Something very satisfying in that as well.

 

I am completely unable to enjoy the sound of synthesised instruments.

I can just about bear it in a few songs (i.e. Radiohead) but that's just about it.

 

Fortunately I listen 90% to classical...

 

R

[yobucko]

I think many people have missed the point of this article and are taking the sonic quality issue way more seriously than it need be for this specific topic.

 

This article is about so much more than the sound of anything. Sure, sound has been brought up in the comments, but please don't feel the need to defend digital like it's your first-born child.

 

Hi Chris, totally agree and thanks for articulating it so well in your article. Things that are real...

 

This is my first post, but I found myself lurking (and learning) ever since I found your review of the original Peachtree iNova. That was my first non-home-theater, music-dedicated Amp which started me on a rediscovery of HIGH QUALITY digital music. Like many of us I was corrupted through the 00's when I converted all of my silver discs to RealAudio and then later, MP3... getting it wrong every time (obviously).

 

A lot has changed, in the years since... a dedicated dac and higher quality sources mean I no longer need that Tube buffer in the Nova, but it certainly helped me round off the edges of crappy files. Along the way I picked up a Pro-Ject turntable and rediscovered the art of LISTENING to an album. I never understood the us-them mentality.... I mean our speakers are the most important part of our systems... they are analogue... they require PHYSICAL energy. In the future, would you accept "digital speakers" if you could somehow cyborg your brain to do the decoding? At some point the signal path must become analogue again... that's how we think.

 

For my $0.02, I think it is easier and cheaper to build an audiophile-grade (not the uber stuff you all like, but PASSABLE) with a turn-table and a 2nd hand amp than it is to try and do the same with digital.

 

Currently when I LEARN & DISCOVER: it is generally TIDAL --> ROON --> DAC --> AMP --> Speakers....

 

But when I LISTEN: it is "that album I learned about on TIDAL/ROON, purchased as vinyl" --> phono pre --> AMP --> Speakers/Headphones.

 

A good digital track is still just a track that may or may not have continuity with the next...

 

But committing to an album is a deliberate act of slowing down... putting one's feet up... committing to the experience of music.

[drjjpdc]

Much to be said for traditional methods such as shaving with a double-edge razor (not a vibrating 5-bladed cartoon monstrosity) and pouring hot water over coffee grounds (I rue the day my mom and brother started using those pods). As far as vinyl, in my system the vinyl is smoother and seems to flow better. I can live with a few pops and clicks. Some of the newer records sound awful (vinyl quality, not the music - example is some of the Vault packages from Jack White) and I have had better luck listening to older vinyl.

Have you guys seen this? Can a Bryston Tube Amplifier be far behind?

 

Bryston BLP-1 Turntable Review | NOVO Magazine

 

John

[STC]

Have you guys seen this? Can a Bryston Tube Amplifier be far behind?

 

Bryston BLP-1 Turntable Review | NOVO Magazine

 

John

 

Anything is possible. Bryson started as Pro sound manufacturer. They made and still making reliable product. Their amplifier was selected for NASA use.

 

Now, I hear more audiophiles talk about Bryson than pro sound guys. It is all about product differentiation to stay in business.

 

I know of a boutique tube preamp and amplifier designer who uses Carver's Sunfire amplifier for his setup. And now Carver is making tube amplifiers. [emoji23]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[drjjpdc]

Much to be said for traditional methods such as shaving with a double-edge razor (not a vibrating 5-bladed cartoon monstrosity) and pouring hot water over coffee grounds (I rue the day my mom and brother started using those pods). As far as vinyl, in my system the vinyl is smoother and seems to flow better. I can live with a few pops and clicks. Some of the newer records sound awful (vinyl quality, not the music - example is some of the Vault packages from Jack White) and I have had better luck listening to older vinyl.

 

I just found out that Bryston has a TT. Can a tube amp be far behind?

 

John

[drjjpdc]

Much to be said for traditional methods such as shaving with a double-edge razor (not a vibrating 5-bladed cartoon monstrosity) and pouring hot water over coffee grounds (I rue the day my mom and brother started using those pods). As far as vinyl, in my system the vinyl is smoother and seems to flow better. I can live with a few pops and clicks. Some of the newer records sound awful (vinyl quality, not the music - example is some of the Vault packages from Jack White) and I have had better luck listening to older vinyl.

[drjjpdc]

Didn't Carver always make tube amplifiers?

[Sal1950]

Didn't Carver always make tube amplifiers?

Nope