Forgive me Computeraudiophiles, for I have sinned

[joelha]

Forgive me Computeraudiophiles, for I have sinned

 

I’ve been a devoted digital music listener for a long time. I’ve gone the Mac, Linux and Windows routes (currently Windows). I’m using an SLC SSD OS drive with a Pachanko Sata cable and linear power supplies to power my server, external hard drive and router. My current player of choice is XXHighend. I’m using the Berkeley Alpha Reference 2 DAC and a Mutec clock. I could go on, but you get the idea. I’ve been committed to making my digital sound the best I possibly could.

 

The convenience of digital combined with the fact that I can constantly tweak my signal chain to further improve the sound has always been attractive to me. And I’ve loved the sound.

 

Friends have hounded me to get into vinyl. And, as good as vinyl has sounded, given the very considerable expense of getting very good sound and the additional trouble of playing albums, I haven’t been sold.

 

But something changed all of that.

 

Reel to reel tape.

 

Believe me, I know the issues. First, if albums are inconvenient, tape is even more so. When is the last time you had to rewind a vinyl album? I suppose the time to thread a tape onto a machine and cueing up an album aren’t that different.

 

But then there’s music catalog availability. I’m only interested in playing 15 ips (inches per second) two track tapes. The availability of those tapes is very limited and for those recently recorded, crazy expensive. You can spend up to $500 and more for an album. Even a really good 2500 foot blank tape can run $70+ dollars with aluminum reel. And then you’ll only get 33 minutes of recording time at 15 ips.

 

If the story ended there, I would have said stayed away from the reel to reel option.

 

But, and I know for some this will be controversial, I’ve been listening to ripped CD’s recorded onto tape and loving it. Have I made my copy of the music more accurate than the source? Of course not. I know the copied version is a “colored” copy of the original. And I don’t care. For this audiophile, it’s smoother richer and highlights how far digital still has to go. I could far more easily listen to my reel to reel player for five hours at a time than my digital system. And I still love my digital system . . . but now, just not as much.

 

A few comments about replies to this post.

 

If you want to debate the benefits of custom sata cables, linear power supplies and the like, please do it on the thousand other threads on this site which do that.

If you want to question the value of spending so much money on a dac or using a clock, please do that elsewhere as well. That’s not the point of this thread.

 

If, on the other hand, you want to tell me you have a digital system which matches or exceeds the enjoyment factor you have had from reel to reel tape, please chime in.

Other comments or questions are welcome as well. I’m very new to this reel to reel part of the hobby and, for all the reasons I’ve mentioned above, won’t abandon the digital part of my system. But it’s a heck of a lot harder to go back to now.

 

Joel

[NOMBEDES]

"There are many paths to God".  Elizabeth I.

 

Enjoy the music.......

[PeterSt]

Joel, are you able to perceive noise from your speakers with the volume wide open ? (ear in speaker is allowed)

[joelha]

I was waiting to hear from you on this topic, Peter, I just didn't expect to hear from you so quickly. ?

 

Volume wide-open, not a sound with my ear to my speakers.

 

Joel

[kumakuma]

Glad to hear that you're enjoying your music. At the end of the day, this is what it's all about.

 

Have you listened to any of the tape transfers done by High Definition Tape Transfers? Be interesting to know if they retain the characteristics that you're enjoying.

[adamdea]

I’m inclined to be biased in my assessment of audio formats towards those which have some music available in them. 

[PeterSt]

1 minute ago, joelha said:

Volume wide-open, not a sound with my ear to my speakers

 

Hi Joel, OK, good.

So how much noise do you perceive - volume wide open again - from a blank part of tape ?

For the following, I assume you will hear something.

 

If you set the tape deck to record mode + pause and monitor the output (to the speakers), is the noise there too (its character can be different now) ?

 

How do you like the sound when you play digital in this mode ? Thus, record-pause and monitor the output hence play through the tape deck's electronics.

 

Kind regards,

Peter

[joelha]

3 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

Glad to hear that you're enjoying your music. At the end of the day, this is what it's all about.

 

Have you listened to any of the tape transfers done by High Definition Tape Transfers? Be interesting to know if they retain the characteristics that you're enjoying.

You know, you remind me that I've been wanting to do that.

 

When I get to that, I'll try to remember to report back.

 

Thanks for the reminder.

 

Joel

[joelha]

3 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Hi Joel, OK, good.

So how much noise do you perceive - volume wide open again - from a blank part of tape ?

For the following, I assume you will hear something.

 

If you set the tape deck to record mode + pause and monitor the output (to the speakers), is the noise there too (its character can be different now) ?

 

How do you like the sound when you play digital in this mode ? Thus, record-pause and monitor the output hence play through the tape deck's electronics.

 

Kind regards,

Peter

What an interesting question, Peter.

 

It will take me a bit of time to get to that test. But you've made me curious.

 

Thanks a lot for the suggestion.

 

Joel

[PeterSt]

4 minutes ago, joelha said:

What an interesting question, Peter.

 

I could go one step further (start laughing) :

 

Assuming it is a 3-head deck hence you can monitor live what's really on the tape during recording, you could spend $70 per time the one reel wears out. So you're just using that one reel always (turn it around after 30 minutes - haha).

Of course you readily start to see that your problem is solved. 

 

Did someone already tell you that I am crazy ?

 

PS: I know that @manisandherhas explicit experience in this field, although it sprung from comparing needle drops. I think he will tell you that the monitoring like this is not 100% equal to the later playback and I forgot why. But it could be just the thing you are looking for (to sort out further).

 

Peter

[joelha]

I definitely want to look into this, Peter.

 

Thanks for the (crazy) suggestion.

 

Joel

[jabbr]

28 minutes ago, joelha said:

Volume wide-open, not a sound with my ear to my speakers.

 

Try connecting your amp directly to your headphones -- if you can't hear a noise you're deaf ?

 

Yes I think you are onto something but that's why I've been looking into and started listening to the HDTT transfers -- to either DSD256 or DXD 24/352 transfers ...

[vmartell22]

First thing I thought when I got my vinyl rig after many years of digital only - this is cool - however, wish I could get into reel-to-reel - that is REALLY the non-plus-ultra of analog!

 

but then I saw the prices....

nah

 

 

v

[firedog]

Joel-

Cool that you are enjoying the tapes.

Back in the analog days, I knew several serious audiophiles who had reel to reel players and preferred them to LPs. They also bought tapes and recorded LPs. It did sound very good. And they had some pre-recorded tapes that were official releases that sounded very good - sort of funny when you consider that they were mass produced commercial copies that were at most 7.5 ips (maybe even 3.75), and far from being a close generation to a master.

 

Just curious- would a DAC like a Lampizator get you closer to that sound you are enjoying than a DAC like the Berkeley? It is a different sound. 

 

You haven't sinned. If you like the sound of the tape, that's all that matters. Just don't post here saying it is "superior" to digital. Then we will have to gang up on you....?

[joelha]

That's why I posted, Firedog. 

 

If people have found ways to emulate or duplicate the sound I'm hearing, digitally, I'm all for learning about it. 

 

As for the Lampizator, I don't know but would be happy to learn from others. 

 

Thanks. 

 

Joel

[mansr]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

Back in the analog days, I knew several serious audiophiles who had reel to reel players and preferred them to LPs.

There's no question that reel to reel tape beats LP.

[GUTB]

Well, welcome to the club of audiophiles who are learning about the LIES of digital vs analog.

 

I’ve heard reel-to-reel at shows, and they never fail to impress. I liken the sound to high end vinyl except better — quieter, smoother, even more totally correct, etc. Music that would have a certain stridency or edge in even the best digital setups are delivered with total elegance from tape.

 

 

[joelha]

2 minutes ago, GUTB said:

I’ve heard reel-to-reel at shows, and they never fail to impress. I liken the sound to high end vinyl except better — quieter, smoother, even more totally correct, etc. Music that would have a certain stridency or edge in even the best digital setups are delivered with total elegance from tape.

 

 

You've said it better than I did, GUTB.

 

Joel

[Ralf11]

One of the "lies" is that you can always beat a $20k analog system with a cheap $500 digital system.

 

The truth is that you can only do it sometimes.

[fas42]

4 hours ago, GUTB said:

I’ve heard reel-to-reel at shows, and they never fail to impress. I liken the sound to high end vinyl except better — quieter, smoother, even more totally correct, etc. Music that would have a certain stridency or edge in even the best digital setups are delivered with total elegance from tape.

 

 

 

OK, core of the matter, right here. Digital should never deliver stridency or edge - if the rig does, then you're hearing distortion contributed by the playback chain ...

 

The R2R experience rounds the sharp edges - it's a type of distortion which is pleasant to listen to, meaning that it can be enjoyed at higher volumes. With digital, the sharp edges are normally there but they need to be reproduced with extreme accuracy - if they  are not, then all the usual complaints about "digital sound" will be expressed. Unfortunately, everything in conventional audio setups conspires against getting those sharp edges 100% true - only those with the money or who are fully devoted to the exercise tend to get this right, and then a "miracle" happens, . Amazingly rich, full SQ emerges - and one loses all interest in the analogue thing ... .

[joelha]

OK, fas42, I'll bite. 

 

Please describe the exact components of a digital playback chain that will perform as you've described. 

 

Not a challenge. A sincere question. 

6 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

OK, core of the matter, right here. Digital should never deliver stridency or edge - if the rig does, then you're hearing distortion contributed by the playback chain ...

 

The R2R experience rounds the sharp edges - it's a type of distortion which is pleasant to listen to, meaning that it can be enjoyed at higher volumes. With digital, the sharp edges are normally there but they need to be reproduced with extreme accuracy - if they  are not, then all the usual complaints about "digital sound" will be expressed. Unfortunately, everything in conventional audio setups conspires against getting those sharp edges 100% true - only those with the money or who are fully devoted to to the exercise tend to get this right, and then a "miracle" happens, . Amazingly rich, full SQ emerges - and one loses all interest in the analogue thing ... .

OK, fas42, I'll bite. 

 

Please describe the exact components of a digital playback chain that will perform as you've described. 

 

Not a challenge. A sincere question. 

 

Joel

[jabbr]

4 minutes ago, fas42 said:

only those with the money or who are fully devoted to to the exercise tend to get this right, and then a "miracle" happens, . Amazingly rich, full SQ emerges - and one loses all interest in the analogue thing ... .

 

How about just once give us an exact description of a specific system of your own, and list each modification you made, specifically, in order to create your resultant miracle. 

[fas42]

11 minutes ago, joelha said:

OK, fas42, I'll bite. 

 

Please describe the exact components of a digital playback chain that will perform as you've described. 

 

Not a challenge. A sincere question. 

OK, fas42, I'll bite. 

 

Please describe the exact components of a digital playback chain that will perform as you've described. 

 

Not a challenge. A sincere question. 

 

Joel

 

If you're like most audio people, you won't like the answers ...

 

It's not the components of the chain that matter so much, it's the amount of effort you go to to optimising every aspect of its operating. With digital playback, the SQ is extremely sensitive to all sorts of subtle weaknesses and interference factors - one has to carefully evaluate where those issues are, and resolve them. "Dumb" things like exactly how the interconnecting cables are organised, and positioned, can mean the difference between prime, and awful sound - just hooking everything together, and hitting Play, is guaranteed not to get the results you want.

 

Yes, it shouldn't be like that ... but the implementation of the audio gear used is normally not good enough - so you or someone else has to sort it out.

 

[jabbr]

11 minutes ago, fas42 said:

"Dumb" things like exactly how the interconnecting cables are organised, and positioned, can mean the difference between prime, and awful sound - just hooking everything together, and hitting Play, is guaranteed not to get the results you want.

 

Yes, it shouldn't be like that ... but the implementation of the audio gear used is normally not good enough - so you or someone else has to sort it out.

Frank, just one example of a single system of your own. Tell us each optimization you made. Can you be specific?

[fas42]

29 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

How about just once give us an exact description of a specific system of your own, and list each modification you made, specifically, in order to create your resultant miracle. 

 

Ummm, we've already been here - I gave an exensive list of what I did with the first rig, some time ago in a post on one of the threads. Dig it up, and we can go over it with a fine tooth comb if you like ...

 

The "fine tooth comb" approach is how it needs to be done, unfortunately. The audio friend up the road still hasn't achieved the best sound, even with me looking over his shoulder - he resisted doing certain things for ages, because "it's just too awkward, messy!" ... I knew this would always hold the sound back, but he had to convince himself of the need.

 

It's not an easy journey; if the gear one bought was better designed and implemented then "a lot of the nonsense" wouldn't be necessary - but at the moment it is.