Analog: Still Better?

[One and a half]

As always we are at the mercy of the recording itself, especially in popular music, a regular crap shoot.  CD's can reproduce the master tapes very well, but when the master tapes contained hiss or other abberations, careless transfers will make the sound of the CD worse than vinyl. Careless can also be pressure due to $$$ and shortcuts made, rather than 'engineering' expertise or lack of. Repeated exceptions from the likes of Bernie Grundmann whose techniques are legendary, take this release as an example.

 

I bought the Technics 1200GR with an Orofon 2M blue some time ago now and gradually built up a collection of records. Each record, even the old ones from the 70's are great sounding, but the soundstage really opened up with an Ortofon 2M Black! Where digital exceeds vinyl is with SACD, the noise floor just vanishes, but these are exceptions. like Fleetwood Mac Rumours on SACD. With good cleaning, vinyl has no perceptible surface noise when playing. If I buy a new release, it is usually on LP.

 

When the Swing Out Sister Kaleidoscope World Fontana release from 1989 on LP and CD, the CD is DULL compared with the LP. LP has sparkle, the opening to Where in the World xylophone is background on CD, LP is right in front. The Japan 2010 SHM-CD release fares worse, nowhere near enough to the LP. If I hear the album on digital, I need to listen to the LP to 'kill the taste' of digital. 

 

Digital. when all the ducks in a row work, it can sound great, variability is a problem caused by insidious background/leakage noise, imperceptible on its own, but combined with signal just screws it up. Vinyl has the advantage of true analog signals, no aliasing errors. I read an article years ago on do we need such wide channel separation and it wasn't all that necessary, but can't seem to find it now.

[One and a half]

2 hours ago, Rexp said:

Can you list a few CD's and SACD's that match vinyl (glare free, alive, gripping) Cheers! 

Here are some SACD.

 

Aimee Mann Lost In space [MFSL] [SACD]
Fleetwood Mac Rumours [SACD] WPCR-14171 2001
Donald Fagen Nightfly [SACD] WPCR-14170 2002
Linda Ronstadt Heart Like a Wheel [MFSL] [SACD] UDSACD2190 2017

[One and a half]

5 hours ago, fas42 said:

 - digital is usually mastered to have a bolder presentation, and so wins in that sense.

Hello, it's usually mastered with more compression and more loudness.

[One and a half]

17 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

This must be from a Vinyl rip then ? 😋

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vqmvxf2ytaop9l2/06 - I Fall To Pieces.flac?dl=0

That piece, scores a JRMC DR10 doesn't have a very good frequency range which tanks at 15kHz and over to the deep dark sea, which is the upper limit of FM broadcasts oddly enough I Fall to Pieces appears on Sausalito 73, similar frequency response.

The track could have come from the Sausalito CD or the LP from the same source, FM broadcast. considering its age, there's no crackles or surface noise unless it's being removed with this tool or something similar. 

[One and a half]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dm69qn1s7667d33/Swing Out Sister - Where in the world (1989 Radical mix)-0x0002.wav?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4wi4ep30eq3snld/The Kaleidoscope Affair-0x0002.wav?dl=0

The 'Where in the World mix' is rubbish, not going to comment further, analog or digital it's poor. What's the point here?

 

The Kaleidoscope Affair (Instrumental)

Drop Box version spectrum analysis

 

CD Version Track 10 (1989) Fontana

 

 

How to capture analog? It's at the mercy of the A/D converter's limitations.

 

 

[One and a half]

25 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Just to give those like myself, who haven't heard of this album a rough idea of it.

I left the 0x0002 in the names to indicate that it was only from a YouTube stream and not from the  the real CD

Well Youtube need to pick up their game, oh wait, you have to pay for that, will that give at least 20-20k bandwidth, probably not.

[One and a half]

1 hour ago, botrytis said:

No, that is Analog. Jeez - they have to compress the highs and lows and lower stereo separation......

No that's digital for laptops and ear buds.

[One and a half]

13 hours ago, fas42 said:

That Swing Out Sister, Where in the World, track would be as good as any to work with - the CD sounding dull is a giveaway that the playback chain is not up to scratch ... rather than bouncing around, trying to find music that sounds goods on say digital, stick with a certain track, and use that as a reference for how you're faring - keep trying things until that particular tracks starts to come good; matches how you know it can sound, on another medium.

 

The key point is, all digital tracks should sound as good as, or better than LP versions - if they don't, that means there's a weakness in the chain; the big trick is to track down the culprit(s).

You haven't considered the source . The playback chain is fine, plays SACD without a problem and those CD that are up to it, also with no side effects.

[One and a half]

11 hours ago, sandyk said:

Gary

 What you heard was from the 0x0002 529kb/s .aac Subscription audio stream that can be extracted after downloading the video with suitable Video S/W.

Compare that sound with the direct video that I posted. Would you rather  base a CD purchasing decision on the video alone , or from the 529kb/s stream to try and see if it sounds worthwhile ?

 

Alex

 

 

I think that analysis should be in a different topic, the sample rate might be redbook, but the 15kHz cutoff is not great. I go for the music, then either LP or CD which ever is easier to buy.

[One and a half]

11 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Source as in, the data encoded in the medium's format? Let's say I rip the contents of a so-so CD track, do an optimum conversion of that data to the SACD format, and burn it onto a disc - and play both the original CD, and the new SACD on your chain - will they sound identical, or will one be "better" than the other?

No, the original purchased CD or SACD with jewel box, glossy paper et al, played in an appropriate player like in my profile. when a DSD_DISC is created, the dsf sounds better on the SACD player than they do from digital chain from computer and IT network. By better I mean less annoying to listen to.

[One and a half]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

So, the mastering as far as the music is concerned is identical - the actual music content is the same. If one format sounds "less annoying", that means firstly that the overall distortion of the playback chain, starting with the reading of the physical file on the disc, is different; and that the distortion of the chain using the SACD player is subjectively less disturbing.

 

No CD should be "annoying" to listen to. My approach to getting digital right is very simple - if I make some changes, and a marginal disc now sounds fine, I then steadily go through my pile of difficult recordings. If every one of them does well, I'm in a good place - if at least one is still sour, that then becomes the measuring stick for making the next move.

Too simplistic and grossly inaccurate (no surprises here). Mastering for CD and LP is different, heard of RIAA curve? 

[One and a half]

3 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

@One and a half is talking of generating a DSD_DISC from the contents of the CD, and that when playing the dsf that it "sounds better on the SACD player" - same mastering.

A DSD_DISC is a DVD-R copied with DSD files, specifically .DSF format. It can be read by (most) Sony SACD, Accuphase, maybe Marantz. The disc has no redbook content whatsover as PCM files cannot be read.

DSDDiscFormatSpecs.pdf

[One and a half]

4 hours ago, jabbr said:

Some of us prefer to play the DSF files through HQPlayer and prefer this. There are so many different ways to play music and there are so many different auditory preferences that each person can do something as they prefer.

 

Of course being a physical CD or DSD or SACD makes the bits none the less digital.

With computer playback, there's the added bonus of transmission noise to listen to

[One and a half]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

But one can convert RB files to DSF files, which is why I asked the question,

 

 

Your answer didn't clarify what your thoughts about this were ...

One can also rip an SACD ISO or download DSF to create a DSD_DISC, brew your own playlist just as simple as a CD. It is not necessary or desirable to convert to PCM (Rebook) to do so.

[One and a half]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

This was sourced from the RBCD track of the Blue Note SACD 7243 5 41747 2 8 , and was a fresh rip after improving the earthing area of my PC as recommended by one and a half

 

If this doesn't crap all over the LP, then you either prefer colouration, or you need to spend almost as much on your digital area as you have on your vinyl gear. 😋

Come away with me has 95 versions according to discogs.  The SACD I have is from Japan, mastered by Mark wilder at Sony Studios NYC, the AP version was engineered by Kevin Gray at Coherent Audio. The LP is from Blue note EU 243-5-32088-1 2004, probably re-issued. Been a while since I compared the two, but would rather the AP LP instead, although the EU LP is a pleasant listen.

[One and a half]

36 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Unfortunately, not all hardware players will play those. I had to use unofficial S/W to enable my Oppo 103 to play them,

 I still preferred the RBCD of Love Over Gold though. I suspect that it was due to the out of band HF residual  of the SACD.

Naww, it's 80's horrid drum machines.... sound bad any time, hopefully all of these are now deceased along with Betamax and VHS video, Laserdisc, composite 240 line video.....

[One and a half]

10 hours ago, botrytis said:

 

Same with analog - scratches, dirt, static, pops, hum, vibration, and of course if using low output cartridges amplification of noise from that.

 

People seem to overlook that noise due to emotional attachment to analog (being brought up with it).

 

 

I thought that after ditching my vinyl collection in the mid 80's, problem was apart from a wipe before playing, that's all I did. Records need to be cleaned, and they don't suffer the funny noises. My gets my goat are new LPs out of the sleeve that are covered in crap at the factory and the crappy paper sleeves that leach fibres into the grooves. This bad habit is narrowed down to EU origin, isn't there a Czech plant. There's no problem with MFSL, Decca releases, well so far.

 

As far as electrical interference is concerned, cabling and proximity need attention and this works. I don't use an MC, so have not experienced trauma with this yet. Low level amplification applies equally to digital, where PSU noise can and does cause problems.

[One and a half]

8 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

If you are having problems with transmission line noise its best not to use them!

By transmission of digital signals includes the source interface (USB, Ethernet), tortuous path of various reclocker/fixers, cables and power supplies to drive them all. It's difficult to argue the point where the source has infinite sample rate of an AC voltage over a (relatively short) distance).

It's easy to generalise though, there are exceptions everywhere. 

[One and a half]

6 hours ago, ASRMichael said:

Relevant to this thread. PS Audio interview with mastering engineer

 

 

 

 

 

Hear, Hear!

[One and a half]

On 3/2/2021 at 1:11 PM, GregWormald said:

For the first time ever I listened for hours to digital music that didn't leave me wanting to turn it down or off or leave me fatigued. Was it as good as my analogue? Don't know, don't care, I'm into music not comparisons.

 

The change was a Denafrips r-to-r ladder DAC (Ares II). I ordered a Denafrips.

What did you have before the Ares II?