Envelope approximation error of about 0.25db in this case. This would be considerably worse than with any analog format.
I've heard some superb playback from LP - as people say, when it hits the spot it does marvellous things! I know it's a cliche track, but the 'coal train' rendition I heard at a high end show over 10 years ago was breathtaking, I could not have imagined it being better done - CD being played through the same system, minutes before, was quite mediocre. But in the recent hifi show that 'coal train' track was running on a system of probably comparable cost to that earlier show - but to be blunt, it was downright dreadful - subjectively, this was approaching transistor radio on the kitchen table quality.
I don't want to point fingers at specific gear, to my mind it's all about how well the setup was optimised, how much care was taken with the tweaking - and where in the cycle of warming up and stabilising the setup was in. At the home of a hifi club member who was using VPI and ARC Reference amps, in one evening the sound ranged from headache inducing, to glorious ... depending upon the state of the cartridge, 🙄 !
Last edited:
Speaking of using YouTube to judge sound, some people talk nonsense of how this is not capable of doing the job: if the person used a half-decent recording device, and then uploaded the content in a high resolution mode then it's easily sufficient to do the job. As an example, a video review by AVShowrooms, BMC DAC1 PRE Review pt 2, the system and listening sessions, BMC Audio - YouTube, tells one all one needs to know - this is classic, modern hifi sound, with all the symptoms of where it usually fails. The interesting thing is that it uses a source DAC by a company, BMC, that managed to produce very good sound at the recent Sydney show, plus heavy duty Pass amps - so it should have done a decent job of it ...
So, what's wrong with the sound? The obvious phrase to use is over-etched, it's equivalent to a TV in the showroom in what they call 'torch' mode - the colour, the contrast are all wound up so it hits you right between the eyes. The 3rd album used, with the singer, is the real giveaway - the treble is a mess, the sound would be impossible to live with ...
So, what's wrong with the sound? The obvious phrase to use is over-etched, it's equivalent to a TV in the showroom in what they call 'torch' mode - the colour, the contrast are all wound up so it hits you right between the eyes. The 3rd album used, with the singer, is the real giveaway - the treble is a mess, the sound would be impossible to live with ...
What does envelope approximation have to do with digital sampling? Do please enlighten us.
I can get goose bumps from music played on a transistor radio. I honestly pity someone who can't get emotional reaction from music played on anything.
I guess you're using the wrong DAC. Do you have one of those noise-ridden S-D ones by any chance? They do rather tend to delete the excitement.
Most certainly I get "goose bumps" with CD, I haven't used LP myself in nearly 30 years. I have heard other people's vinyl setups numerous times in the interim, at every end of the cost spectrum -- and like all audio systems, some do an excellent job, at times - and others are just downright medioce at that moment.
As I have mentioned many times the simple truth is that it's harder to refine a CD setup to give you the goose bumpy thing - if you get the good stuff one day, and the next day the quality has dropped by, say, 0.1%, then the CD replay can sound like sh!t. That's the nature of the beast, trying to treat tweaking of digital playback in the same casual way that one can get away with on a TT system won't work at all - dedication to getting digital sound to work right is essential, otherwise you might as well chuck the CDs into the bin ...
That's a great answer.
I think a lot of it has to do with how familiar you are with the music (some of it is the thrill of discovery), and what your state of mind is while listening. I remember one of the most spine-tingling moments I ever had listening to music was when I was listening to a broadcast of Mahler's 9th on my car radio, in heavy Brooklyn traffic. I was absolutely transfixed. I pulled over just to listen to it... on a lousy car radio. I heard it with "new ears" that evening.
--
Hilarious.
Reading about 78s and high fidelity in the same paragraph. 45s just as bad. Rock n roll never sounded good, whatever media.
Even more hilarity.
Argueing about 16 bits having insufficient amplitude res. Does anyone know the res of styli? Will it reproduce displacements of 10s of nanometers? No.
Crazier and more in the dark than a box of myopic frogs.
Reading about 78s and high fidelity in the same paragraph. 45s just as bad. Rock n roll never sounded good, whatever media.
Even more hilarity.
Argueing about 16 bits having insufficient amplitude res. Does anyone know the res of styli? Will it reproduce displacements of 10s of nanometers? No.
Crazier and more in the dark than a box of myopic frogs.
That's a good point! However still doesn't explain why an high level analogue front end, will sound more natural and dynamic than a digital rig.
Granted that with less than perfect front end, the digital will definitely dominate
Couple of reasons ... analogue is more 'understood', it's been around longer, and people automatically know and make the right moves to improve the subjective experience - there's a vast reservoir of 'common knowledge' on what needs to be done. Digital is still a black art, even the 'experts' are still struggling to understand what works, and what doesn't, in the more subtle areas of SQ.
And, LP is essentially a mechanical process, the really subversive, unpleasant distortion that can intrude into the digital arena, because of its very nature, never crosses over into the vinyl world.
What you say is completely true. Nevertheless I feel that people, most of the time, just assume that vinyl is better because is all analogue.
In my experience and opinion I think it is harder to make LP play correctly even though there is more knowledge on how to work with it, while digital is more universal in that sense, more plug n play kind of a thing.
Just think how many variables for the LP, turntable, tone arm and matching with cartridge, then matching with phono and correct interconnects from the delicate cartridge to the input of the phono.
Digital nowadays is a reliable and neutral source of sound that can be good with/at a relative low price.
In the other end, with a relative low price analogue, all you get is not so great sound.
Usually distortion, lack of dynamic, poor resolution and lots of colorations compared to a high resolution music server of equal price.
Many people just assume analogue is betters at that level without paying too much attention as to what they are really listening to.
This is just my humble opinion though...
In my experience and opinion I think it is harder to make LP play correctly even though there is more knowledge on how to work with it, while digital is more universal in that sense, more plug n play kind of a thing.
Just think how many variables for the LP, turntable, tone arm and matching with cartridge, then matching with phono and correct interconnects from the delicate cartridge to the input of the phono.
Digital nowadays is a reliable and neutral source of sound that can be good with/at a relative low price.
In the other end, with a relative low price analogue, all you get is not so great sound.
Usually distortion, lack of dynamic, poor resolution and lots of colorations compared to a high resolution music server of equal price.
Many people just assume analogue is betters at that level without paying too much attention as to what they are really listening to.
This is just my humble opinion though...
There's the rub - the 'experts' aren't trying to understand what works, rather they consider that they already do understand it. The 'experts' in digital design by the numbers - once those are acceptable, its a 'done deal' according to them. Any complaints about the sound of digital can only come from idiots who totally fail to see that the numbers are telling the whole story.
OTOH designers of analog in commercial high-end audio tend on the whole to be listeners rather than meter readers.
Here we don't agree. Back on the 80s they were meter readers and all about numbers and as we know these designs failed to be considered instruments of reproduction.
Be listeners is something that came later and started bringing some decent designs.
The truth is in the middle, but, I would say that it is far way more important to get approval from listening tests rather than from analyzers.
I disagree here - its way more important (potentially the most most important goal) in the high-end to get approval from reviewers. They're the high priests of the business nowadays.
I can think of some high-end companies who go by the meters - Soulution is one that comes to mind. MSB validates its DACs in marketing materials by showing how they beat TI on one particular measurement. Those are some of the exceptions I reckon.
Reviewers listen with their ears. Ultimately you are going to listen to the sound system therefore ultimate judge should be the ear, don't you think?
Proving that something has a better frequency response or better distortion behavior, is not a guarantee of good sound.
Let me ask you: when you buy a new amplifier, what do you usually do? Go to the store measure it and if you do like the results you just buy it? Is really going to tell you the whole story i.e. How that is going to interface with you existing gears, room and personal music preferences?
😎
Proving that something has a better frequency response or better distortion behavior, is not a guarantee of good sound.
Let me ask you: when you buy a new amplifier, what do you usually do? Go to the store measure it and if you do like the results you just buy it? Is really going to tell you the whole story i.e. How that is going to interface with you existing gears, room and personal music preferences?
😎
This is not so and i have proven this over and over . You can better digital at any level , the difference being the cost of a good phono stage/ pre-amp. The irony is that digital recordings transfered to analog sound better than CD's from the same source...
Go figure ...🙂
The answer's simple ... the recording data has full quality, and always will have - it's what happens at the moment of playback, how much, and in what way that quality is corrupted that determines the subjective experience.
Because pleople like to ear what they think in their heads is the best. No way a HR master plays better on analogue, think about all the passages that has to do.
I am interested, if you can please give an example of how you can beat a..let's say $2k entry level music server with same price for tt, tone arm, cartridge and phono with interconnect!?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.