GUTB Posted July 4, 2018 Author Share Posted July 4, 2018 Time for some real talk. My digital source is better than most members' of CA. Just being real. Most of you guys are running el-cheapo streamers, junk-berry servers with consumer NAS units, laptops, mac minis, etc. I have a custom PC running an I7-7700K with a large passive cooler, no fans anywhere. Paul Pang V3 USB card powered by dedicated battery. SSD on a separate dedicated battery to completely isolate the entire system from SSD noise. Linear ATX PSU. Windows 10 running Fidelizer Pro, Roon and HQPlayer for DSD512 up-sampling (the reason for the powerful CPU). Single RAM stick to minimize noise. It's not perfect because of switching-mode voltage regulators, but very decent. All audio components are on a dedicated circuit and plugged into a Panamax 5400 filter with the exception of the PC and amp (I felt the Panamax is current-starving my power amps). There isn't a single SMPS on the circuit. All components are using audiophile-grade AC cables, except the PC which I feel doesn't make a difference. There are probably less than 20 people on CA with better digital source systems than what I have. I have two DACs in the system currently: a MHZS CD88J CDP which has a tubed power supply and output stage, and the Holo Cyan DSD which is a native DSD-only resistor ladder design. This gives me the ability to listen to two very different digital architectures and compare it with my analog. One of my favorite LPs is Belafonte at Carnegie Hall (200g Analogue Productions) The same album on Tidal: https://tidal.com/browse/album/45182945 Long story short, the LP crushes the streaming version. The main issue? The digital version seems severely hampered in terms of dynamic force / power, but there are other factors which aren't as easy to pin down, but nevertheless do something in the LP which adds to sense of realism which is missing from the digital version. Link to comment
Popular Post The_K-Man Posted July 4, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 4, 2018 Not "lies" so much as simple misunderstanding. Ever hear of something called the 'loudness war'? Well, there's been a loudness race going almost back to wax cylinders, but when digital audio and the CD debuted closing in on 40 years ago, the loudness war in recorded music went NUCLEAR. Digital was metered in peaks, not average, or RMS. About 10 years into the life of the CD, music producers and engineers discovered they could peak normalize albums. Peak normalization led to peak limiting, which when combined with increasing doses of dynamics compression and make-up gain, could produce an album 10-15dB louder average listening level, than one released at any point in the 1980s. The penalty: Decline and loss of realistic transients and openness that gave the recording depth. To summarize, it is the MASTERING, in the digital domain, not any digital format itself(Redbook CD, 24bit high res, lossy MP3, etc) that slowly lent the impression that digital audio was 'lifeless' or 'dull' next to a vinyl equivalent of the same album release. All of the latest, most expensive external DACs, internconnects, room treatments, and boutique speaker wiring will make maybe a percent or two difference in what you hear, compared to simply locating a better source. Some early CDs suffered from first generation ADCs that suffered from clock jitter or excessive quantization errors. That might explain some of the coldness some of the 'vinyl is better' crowd is experiencing with those CDs compared to more relatively recent CD releases. This is what the general public is slowly being made aware of, one thread at a time, in forums such as this one. jjborders, Audiophile Neuroscience, Ajax and 3 others 4 2 Link to comment
davide256 Posted July 4, 2018 Share Posted July 4, 2018 19 minutes ago, The_K-Man said: Not "lies" so much as simple misunderstanding. Ever hear of something called the 'loudness war'? Well, there's been a loudness race going almost back to wax cylinders, but when digital audio and the CD debuted closing in on 40 years ago, the loudness war in recorded music went NUCLEAR. Digital was metered in peaks, not average, or RMS. About 10 years into the life of the CD, music producers and engineers discovered they could peak normalize albums. Peak normalization led to peak limiting, which when combined with increasing doses of dynamics compression and make-up gain, could produce an album 10-15dB louder average listening level, than one released at any point in the 1980s. The penalty: Decline and loss of realistic transients and openness that gave the recording depth. To summarize, it is the MASTERING, in the digital domain, not any digital format itself(Redbook CD, 24bit high res, lossy MP3, etc) that slowly lent the impression that digital audio was 'lifeless' or 'dull' next to a vinyl equivalent of the same album release. This is what the general public is slowly being made aware of, one thread at a time, in forums such as this one. So basically you weren't an adult in the 70's when POP albums were being compressed to avoid AM radio frequency bleeding issues? Regards, Dave Audio system Link to comment
The_K-Man Posted July 4, 2018 Share Posted July 4, 2018 10 minutes ago, davide256 said: So basically you weren't an adult in the 70's when POP albums were being compressed to avoid AM radio frequency bleeding issues? The level of DRC(dynamic range comp) used 40+ years ago can neither compare nor justify the aforementioned 'nuclear' level of compression I referred to. This is the same attitude I get on Head-Fi, GearSlutz, or any other audio forum I participate: people assume that I think DRC is 'some new thing'. Well I hate to disppoint you but I don't think that, one bit. What is relatively more recent is the abuse and misapplication of DRC tools made possible in the digital audio editing domain. Mark my words though: This new thing called 'loudness normalization' is taking over on internet radio streaming platforms, such as iTunes radio and Spotify. Metering plugins more closely calibrated(even than good old RMS) to how we hear and perceive loudness is steadily replacing peak-based metering in DAWs and digital recorders. If you submit a master to iTunes Radio with an average level of +1.5dBfs - YES, it has been done - that service will politely apply -17.5dB of gain to make it as loud, within +-1dB, as all other submissions have been adjusted, to iTunes Radio's -16dBfs loudness standard. The Loudness War is DEAD - Long live the Content War! ? Link to comment
sandyk Posted July 4, 2018 Share Posted July 4, 2018 3 hours ago, GUTB said: The digital version seems severely hampered in terms of dynamic force / power, In part due to the markedly reduced channel separation of vinyl, with more sound concentrated in the centre of the image, instead of perhaps a pin point localisation. How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file. PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020 Link to comment
danadam Posted July 4, 2018 Share Posted July 4, 2018 2 hours ago, The_K-Man said: If you submit a master to iTunes Radio with an average level of +1.5dBfs - YES, it has been done - that service will politely apply -17.5dB of gain to make it as loud, within +-1dB, as all other submissions have been adjusted, to iTunes Radio's -16dBfs loudness standard. youtube shows the level of applied normalization in "stats for nerds": Link to comment
GUTB Posted July 4, 2018 Author Share Posted July 4, 2018 23 minutes ago, sandyk said: In part due to the markedly reduced channel separation of vinyl, with more sound concentrated in the centre of the image, instead of perhaps a pin point localisation. The imaging on the LP is significantly better. Part of that is the result of the tubed phono stage I'm using but still. You touch on another lie, regarding the effect on stereo separation on imaging. Obviously stereo seperation has an impact but the reality is more complex. My Triangle Art Zeus (LOMC MSRP $4k) has pretty strong channel separation specs of 30 dB but even that is nothing compared to digital audio. And yet imaging -- depth, solidity and position -- is massively superior on this LP versus either of my DACs with the Holo Cyan being the worst. Link to comment
Popular Post gmgraves Posted July 4, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 4, 2018 15 hours ago, GUTB said: There is a massive proliferation of misinformation regarding vinyl in relation to digital. I realize much of that is just willful ignorance on the part of non-audiophiles / class warfare activists, etc.... however all senior audiophiles seem to know that LPs crush CD and streaming, but if you to get a technical or even theoretical basis for that phenomena by researching it all you find is misinformation about why digital is better. I'm a senior audiophile, and I don't agree that LPs crush digital as a general rule. To illustrate my point, I will answer each of your "lie" challenges one by one: 15 hours ago, GUTB said: Lie: vinyl suffers from heavy dynamic compression — so why do my LPs display vastly better dynamic power/force? Technically, this is correct and not a lie. Theoretically, CDs are capable of 96dB of dynamic range, while at best, the very finest LPs are capable of less than 60dB of dynamic range (that's a big difference). The LP medium is limited by a number of things. Probably, the most limiting is the noise floor of pressed vinyl plastic. The noise floor of virgin vinyl (no remix) is about -56dB that's 40dB noisier than a CD. But, in reality, few to no CDs are recorded with full dynamic range because they aren't made strictly for audiophiles. The reality is that people don't want to be jumping-up or reaching for the remote to turn down loud crescendos or turn-up triple-pianissimos every few moments. So practically all recordings have the loudest passages reduced in volume and the softest passages increases in volume - at least some. Vinyl likewise has it's dynamic range compressed because of the aforementioned high noise floor of the material, so the lowest volume passages have to increased to avoid getting lost in the swish of vinyl granularity. But, vinyl and analog tape, do have one advantage over digital. music can be recorded that is actually below the noise floor. In other words, the listener can still hear extremely low level content when that content is softer than the noise of the record/tape itself! Digital cannot do this. That is why in the early days of CD critics said that CDs don't do ambience and reverb very well. when the least significant bit is toggled, that's it. No softer sound can be encoded! Ways around this have been found, and adding 8 more bits to digital (making 24) has given recording engineers a lot more room at the bottom to encode these extremely soft passages, but still, when the LSB is toggled, that's it. On the top end of the dynamic range envelope, LP is restricted, again, by the limitations of the media itself. If a mastering engineer over modulates while cutting an LP on a lathe, several unwanted things will occur: First of all, the stylus will cut through the adjacent groove wall, rendering that groove untraceable by a stylus! secondly, the engineer will likely burn-out the cutting head. One of the the paradoxes about cutting vinyl records is that the ruby stylus on a cutting head is heated to help it cut through the lacquer that coats the aluminum master discs. Still, a cutting head - even a heated one, takes lots of power to move the stylus at all, and then just a few more Watts to burn it out. Believe me, a cutting engineer is a master craftsman. If he knows what he is doing (and he WANTS TO) he can get sound sound out of an LP that the automatic setting on a record cutting rig can't come within a country mile of! Also the cutting head is not only susceptible of being destroyed by over modulation, but the sound cut to an LP has to go through all kinds of dynamic limiters such as an acceleration limiter that's in-line with the cutter head coils! It's a wonder LPs sound as good as they do. OTOH, Digital can't record anything greater than it's most significant bit (MSB - either 16 or 24 bits, usually). If the recording engineer exceeds "O" Vu, on his level meters, digital makes one of the nastiest noises imaginable. So both formats are restricted to the "size" of their containers. Still, the best commercially available recorded sound I've ever heard from my system is from a particular LP. It has so much to do with the process of making the finished recording, that any absolute proclamation made about any recorded music medium is simply not true. There are CDs that sound better than SACDS or Audio Blu-Rays, and there are LPs that sound better than any of them. It's all in the care taken to produce the final product. 15 hours ago, GUTB said: Lie: vinyl has less resolution — macro resolution is greater in my digital that’s true, but why is inner detail and tonal color so much better on vinyl? Like I said above. Vinyl and analog tape are capable registering low level detail that is below their noise floor and the listener can listen "through" the vinyl or tape noise and hear that low level detail. When the LSB of a digital system is toggled, that's generally the end of it. There is no more. However within the confines of either format's restrictions on dynamic range, and frequency response, they should be about equal in their ability to capture what the microphones used has picked-up. 15 hours ago, GUTB said: Lie: vinyl suffers from a lot of distortion — perhaps, but why do my LPs sound more live and lifelike than my digital? That's the easiest. In many cases, LPs have a type of distortion that is extremely euphonic. No doubt that digital, within it's limits, has less overall distortion, but the distortion that it does have doesn't sound as good as vinyl distortion. Remember, at max record level, CD is toggling (using) all 16 bits and there is where it has it's lowest distortion + noise (96dB)! At half record level, CD is toggling only half it's a available bits (8) and has a drastically reduced distortion + noise figure (48dB and that means more distortion and more noise) and is worse than a new LP. Analog gets cleaner the smaller the signal, digital gets cleaner the higher the signal)! But of course, a CD gives one it's best compromised sound forever, and LPs degrade each time they are played. 15 hours ago, GUTB said: So what’s going on here? Could the issue be that these aren’t lies so much as not accounting for awful ADCs and digital mastering techniques? It does all seem to come down to methodology, expertise, and desire on the part of the recording companies - possibly with some equipment choice decisions thrown-in for good measure. I know that my own digital recordings that I have recorded sound better than practically any commercial recording that I've ever heard and that is on vinyl or any digital format one can name! So I don't think the differences favor analog over digital. Digital is clearly better. But it may not be perceived that way for reasons to numerous to list. Like some wag once observed, "When drinking tea, there is plenty of slip, twixt the cup and the lip." IOW, in any endeavor, there's lots to go wrong! semente, Teresa, Confused and 2 others 2 1 2 George Link to comment
Popular Post sandyk Posted July 5, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 5, 2018 6 minutes ago, GUTB said: The imaging on the LP is significantly better. Part of that is the result of the tubed phono stage I'm using but still. Absolute garbage ! Pinpoint imaging is highly dependent on the amount of channel separation, and Vinyl cartridges rarely have even 45dB separation between channels. Lower than that, and the central image becomes quite a bit more diffused (wider) which many may find more pleasing. A tubed Phono stage is simply not capable of the S/N of the best Solid State designs either, although that is probably less important due to the markedly lower S/N of a vinyl pressing compared with Digital. Also, the S/N of a low noise Solid State Moving Coil Preamplifier can be markedly improved by the use of several low noise parallel devices, which you can't readily do with valves. What you are reporting is entirely due to personal taste ! If that floats your boat, fine, but don't claim that it is due to the superiority of vinyl over digital ! semente, Confused, kumakuma and 1 other 2 1 1 How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file. PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020 Link to comment
Popular Post mansr Posted July 5, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 5, 2018 12 minutes ago, gmgraves said: vinyl and analog tape, do have one advantage over digital. music can be recorded that is actually below the noise floor. In other words, the listener can still hear extremely low level content when that content is softer than the noise of the record/tape itself! Digital cannot do this Digital can do this just fine with dither and possibly noise shaping. How do you think 1-bit DSD can achieve 120 dB dynamic range below 20 kHz? Nordkapp, esldude and Teresa 1 1 1 Link to comment
MetalNuts Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 13 hours ago, firedog said: In the early 80's, if you had a typical entry level vinyl rig for people who cared about audio (say Shure or Ortofon cartridge and Dual Turntable), you may have been very favorably impressed by the sound of CD: no surface noise, lots of dynamics (louder than vinyl!), no clicks and pops. I can still remember my vinyl system consisted of Harman Kardon turntable (belt drive), Shure Mark IV MM cartridge, NAD 3020 integrated amp and AR bookshelf speakers. It was better than my mom's all in one gear (turntable, radio, amp, speaker) but ... MetalNuts Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 GUTB, I think the hearing/SQ problem here is really with the batteries in your system. I hate to say it but your batteries suck - at least for digital. Don't try to cheap out on the batteries. Get yourself some vanadium salt flow batteries and run the digital system on them. Nordkapp 1 Link to comment
Nordkapp Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 4 minutes ago, Ralf11 said: GUTB, I think the hearing/SQ problem here is really with the batteries in your system. I hate to say it but your batteries suck - at least for digital. Don't try to cheap out on the batteries. Get yourself some vanadium salt flow batteries and run the digital system on them. Actually, I was left wondering why not just purchase a top flight, dedicated file player/streamer? Seems like a s#*t ton work to me to have a quiet PC. Link to comment
Popular Post pkane2001 Posted July 5, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 5, 2018 8 minutes ago, Ralf11 said: GUTB, I think the hearing/SQ problem here is really with the batteries in your system. I hate to say it but your batteries suck - at least for digital. Don't try to cheap out on the batteries. Get yourself some vanadium salt flow batteries and run the digital system on them. Let’s be real: GUTB’s PC sucks. Once he upgrades the power cords and the fuses, then maybe his system will sound more analog. But it must be the really expensive power cords and fuses, the other kind sucks and is for consumer audio only. Audiophile Neuroscience and semente 1 1 -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
Audiophile Neuroscience Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 7 hours ago, GUTB said: My digital source is better than most members' of CA. Just being real. So then that only leaves.....your ears suck ? (sorry couldn't resist) semente 1 Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
Popular Post PeterSt Posted July 5, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 5, 2018 8 hours ago, GUTB said: I have a custom PC running an I7-7700K with a large passive cooler, no fans anywhere. Paul Pang V3 USB card powered by dedicated battery. SSD on a separate dedicated battery to completely isolate the entire system from SSD noise. Linear ATX PSU. Windows 10 running Fidelizer Pro, Roon and HQPlayer for DSD512 up-sampling (the reason for the powerful CPU). Single RAM stick to minimize noise. It's not perfect because of switching-mode voltage regulators, but very decent. GUTB, there is nothing in there that implies good sound. I am serious. I count 9 explicitly sound degrading matters in there. Yes, I am still serious. And for that reason : 8 hours ago, GUTB said: My digital source is better than most members' of CA. Poor CA members. But hahahahaha. Foggie, semente and Audiophile Neuroscience 2 1 Lush^3-e Lush^2 Blaxius^2.5 Ethernet^3 HDMI^2 XLR^2 XXHighEnd (developer) Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer) Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer) Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier) Link to comment
Audiophile Neuroscience Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 3 minutes ago, PeterSt said: GUTB, there is nothing in there that implies good sound. I am serious. I count 9 explicitly sound degrading matters in there. Yes, I am still serious. Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
MetalNuts Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 49 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said: So then that only leaves.....your ears suck ? (sorry couldn't resist) There are humble persons like me and there are arrogant persons around me. MetalNuts Link to comment
Popular Post asdf1000 Posted July 5, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 5, 2018 8 hours ago, GUTB said: Time for some real talk. My digital source is better than most members' of CA. Just being real. Most of you guys are running el-cheapo streamers, junk-berry servers with consumer NAS units, laptops, mac minis, etc. I have a custom PC running an I7-7700K with a large passive cooler, no fans anywhere. Paul Pang V3 USB card powered by dedicated battery. SSD on a separate dedicated battery to completely isolate the entire system from SSD noise. Linear ATX PSU. Windows 10 running Fidelizer Pro, Roon and HQPlayer for DSD512 up-sampling (the reason for the powerful CPU). Single RAM stick to minimize noise. It's not perfect because of switching-mode voltage regulators, but very decent. This i7-7700K is directly USB connected to your USB DAC? From my own experience (not expertise) I think you'd be far better off having the PC a couple of rooms away and having something like the Sonore ultraRendu in the listening room. This way the Rendu (or Allo USBridge or SMS-200 or whatever similar) and hence DAC input, is ethernet isolated (and distance isolated, i.e RF interference) from your PC. Just have a Netgear FS108 or GS108 unmanaged switch inside the listening room (later you can do a simple John Swenson PSU grounding trick) From my experiences (again, not an expert), getting the powerful PC far away from the listening room and network isolated, and just having the low powered 'endpoint' (streamer) connected to the DAC, proved to be one of the best system changes I made. Nordkapp and Confused 1 1 Link to comment
Popular Post PeterSt Posted July 5, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 5, 2018 I still like a thread like this better than any of the MQA threads. Ajax, Zakus, Audiophile Neuroscience and 2 others 3 2 Lush^3-e Lush^2 Blaxius^2.5 Ethernet^3 HDMI^2 XLR^2 XXHighEnd (developer) Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer) Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer) Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier) Link to comment
PeterSt Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 Found another deficiency : 4 hours ago, GUTB said: The Windows mixer must be bypassed for optimal SQ. Set your music playback software to use exclusive mode access to the sound card. If you can chose the device driver, you are looking for WASAPI, possibly Kernel mode, and if all else fails there's always ASIO. The only thing to bear in mind is that SPDIF / toslink WASAPI drivers may not let you pass 176/192 kHz streams, in which case you'll have to use ASIO if you want to play those. JRiver has a way to deal with that; you can set one zone with specific settings for playing back 96 kHz and less using WASAPI, and another zone to play back 176 kHz and higher using ASIO. From a settings perspective, that's pretty much all you can do. Further SQ gains will require better hardware. You don't know what you're dealing with ... So you also can't control it. Audiophile Neuroscience 1 Lush^3-e Lush^2 Blaxius^2.5 Ethernet^3 HDMI^2 XLR^2 XXHighEnd (developer) Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer) Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer) Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier) Link to comment
Audiophile Neuroscience Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 11 minutes ago, PeterSt said: I still like a thread like this better than any of the MQA threads. What have you got against fanatics preaching to themselves in a close knit circle, circle something or other ? ?? look&listen 1 Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
Audiophile Neuroscience Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 20 minutes ago, MetalNuts said: There are humble persons like me and there are arrogant persons around me. Humility exudes from your Avatar !? Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
Popular Post PeterSt Posted July 5, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 5, 2018 1 minute ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said: 17 minutes ago, PeterSt said: I still like a thread like this better than any of the MQA threads. What have you got against fanatics preaching to themselves in a close knit circle, circle something or other ? ?? No, nothing. I am a cult leader myself. But I know of no MQA on LP appliance, so that must be a good thing. Hooray for LP ! look&listen and Audiophile Neuroscience 1 1 Lush^3-e Lush^2 Blaxius^2.5 Ethernet^3 HDMI^2 XLR^2 XXHighEnd (developer) Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer) Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer) Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier) Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now