Because solid state storage is not very secure for long term storage. Last I heard digital data could be insured for seven years. For long term storage movies still get printed to film, even if they were shot and post produced on digital. The only business Eastman still has in silver halide is with archival stock that can be insured for up to 80 years.
Petabytes of Solid state is still spendy. Plus like any other media it wears out over time so you need redundancy etc. For (say) Sony music who foisted DSD on us as it was their archiving format (citation not available so may be urban legend) converting all their tape archives to SSD would be a non-trivial pursuit.
edison disks are still readable after all this time. No digital storage has been around that long.
edison disks are still readable after all this time. No digital storage has been around that long.
I'm enjoying these desperate and borderline irrelevant attempts to deflect attention away from the now well established inferiority of analog recordings when purchased for personal enjoyment. Proceed.
Yes, there is. Most analogue recordings have been remastered extremely poorly for digital. Which does not prove anything regarding the formats, only that the mastering/production engineers were morons. Hardly surprising.
Newly recorded digital stuff otoh is quite often spectacular and in many ways exceeds what is available on LPs.
Unfortunately it is very difficult to get a reproduction system which excels equally in both formats. There is always a bias, one way, or the other.
It is a fact and indisputable that sooner or later all/any digital reproduction will outperform analog. Right now, it already applies to some of us but may be only a few who has been there [hence the title of the thread]...
Something doesn't have to be more accurate to be satisfying. The fact that people can enjoy some significant errors in their playback system is testament to that. The popularity of NOS DACs for example.
It is hard to say which one is more accurate when nothing is actually accurate [the final sound]. If THD is the ultimate and sole measure for accuracy, of course it is easy to say which one is more accurate, but THD is not.
For people like me, with mediocre stuffs, analog or digital is just a matter of taste or preference or chance. There are better analogs than my digital and there are better digitals than my analog...
But when I look at people with cost no object budget and realize that most of them prefer analog... I think forcing that "digital is better" is a bit irrational.
I was referring to LP listening vs the same LP that was digitized and stored on CD. There is losses in detail with the CD copy of the LP compared to LP copy played via Nottingham. The CD burner is a Sony CDR-W33.
I've heard many CD players and they all sound very unique. DAC's must vary wildly, some players really lack detail and sound warm and fuzzy like a mediocre turntable. Have you heard a Rega Planet 2000? - My turntable is a far more revealing.
A sony S9000ES is very revealing of details, very comparable to my table but the majority of my LP's seem to have the edge or I should say reveal detail without sounding edgy.
Just a thought I have: Whatever difference in accuracy there might be between the best digital playback compared to the best LP playback, it's small in comparison to the masking of detail and accuracy with horn speakers compared to direct radiators that have good diffraction control. In other words playing either CD or LP through horns/waveguides, there is a significant loss of detail, and with soundstage deformity, but playing CD or LP through direct radiators, detail and soundstage architecture is much more intact.
The majority have digital these days and if you do a quick poll on here digital is the winner... the thread is biased from the title onwards towards a wish for analogue to be better... it isn't and neither do you have to spend bucket loads on a system for decent digital reproduction...
Sorry, i misunderstood. The type of cd burner is much less important than the type of ADC. Don't tell me you used the one inside your laptop 🙂
By the models you mention i gather you are comparing decent equipment which is roughly 15 years old, right? Whereas LP gear in this price/quality range has not advanced any, digital has really been transformed.
10-15 years ago i would not seriously consider digital as a music medium outside the car, but today things imho are very different.
Hi. I used analogue in on the CDR-W33 - its a pro audio project studio burner.
don't know what type of ADC inside it.
Yes, I understand and it begs the question, why did digital need to advance?
Afterall it was perfect to begin with. 😕
Maybe LP still has one ounce more of resolution over CD, buried in the mechanical noise and can be revealed with the right setup, and this small amount resolution manifests into a large and important feature to the LP listener.
Honestly, I don't believe I've heard cd player that was designed within the last 10 years.
Any recommendations?
No, today things aren't all that different. CD was transparent from the beginning, although it had it's teething troubles (largely on the recording side).
I think CD players as a digital source are largely obsolete, I have a Sony HAP-Z1ES which I think in both objective and subjective terms performs rather well. I still have a preference for vinyl over most digital, but find most material more than adequately enjoyable through the HAP.
The HAP is fairly competitive with my analog sources while costing a good deal less, and is definitely less of a hassle to use and keep running optimally. (There is no upkeep other than an occasional dusting. lol)
As an aside I have ripped vinyl to digital using one of my pre-amps into an M-Audio 2496, at the highest sample rate I suspect it would be well nigh impossible to tell the digital copy apart from the original in a blind test, even at 44k the differences are minor and probably indistinguishable to most. This would seem to point to problems in production and mastering more than of the medium itself. I've felt for a long time that many of the problems ascribed to digital players might be lain at the feet of poor analog and mixed signal design in the player. (Perhaps clock stability too)
The HAP is fairly competitive with my analog sources while costing a good deal less, and is definitely less of a hassle to use and keep running optimally. (There is no upkeep other than an occasional dusting. lol)
As an aside I have ripped vinyl to digital using one of my pre-amps into an M-Audio 2496, at the highest sample rate I suspect it would be well nigh impossible to tell the digital copy apart from the original in a blind test, even at 44k the differences are minor and probably indistinguishable to most. This would seem to point to problems in production and mastering more than of the medium itself. I've felt for a long time that many of the problems ascribed to digital players might be lain at the feet of poor analog and mixed signal design in the player. (Perhaps clock stability too)
Resolution of the delta sigma is getting higher and higher and the recording might soon adjust itself making the redbook standard obsolete. It is a very slow progress and like usual imo it is a business barrier instead of technical.
May be the more people realize that digital is not perfect, the demand, the faster the transformation. I think that when the digital filter technology was developed they weren't aware that some issues were audible. Just like today, many thinks that digital is already perfect.
No one is saying its perfect just better than analogue as a medium fo storing and playing back music.
I can listen to records all day.
Digital? An hour or so, and I loose interest. Something is missing. For me.
I am sorry that I haven't read the previous 1458 posts, if that is offensive, please disregard this post.
And as usual YMMV.
cheers
Digital? An hour or so, and I loose interest. Something is missing. For me.
I am sorry that I haven't read the previous 1458 posts, if that is offensive, please disregard this post.
And as usual YMMV.
cheers
- Status
- Not open for further replies.