How better is a Turntable compared to a CD?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#2,683
kevinkr said:
I have some material in .DSF format (DSD file format) from Bluecoast records on the server, and these are probably the best sounding recordings on the server including a number HD PCM files of 24/88, 24/96, and 24/192.
Click to expand...
There are two factors at work: sometimes the hi-res version is mastered to come across better than CD, because it's "supposed to sound superior"; and often the implementation of the playback chain will favour reproduction at the higher bit rate.

I've gone through the exercise of stripping off the extra information supposedly in very high quality recordings, and there's nothing particularly significant there - mostly it's purely random ultrasonic noise, and short transient bursts just above 20kHz, at odd moments when a highly percussive sound occurs. If one just resamples CD material to whatever hi-res format you favour, you'll get 99.9% of the benefit that you can hear with these "special" reordings ...
 
#2,686
a.wayne said:
Sy,

1. What is established acceptable distortion ..?
2. Established by whom ... ?
3. How are you overcoming transformer distortion and hysteresis ?
Click to expand...

Overcome distortion caused by saturation of the core and especially hysteresis? Impossible, you can't! Also, Tube amp have mechanical noise associated which contributes to overall noise performance and distortion (micro-phonic). also they have a huge amount of second harmonic distortion associated to the natural topology used and last but not least the device itself.
Deliverable power is minimal. And distortion increases exponentially as output power increases.
I could go on and on...and it would just get worse than Vinyl vs. Digital....but yet still people listen to Tubes...why?! Because all these above parameters have not significant impact on the overall listening experience!
 
#2,688
Stefanoo said:
Also, Tube amp have mechanical noise associated which contributes to overall noise performance and distortion (micro-phonic). also they have a huge amount of second harmonic distortion associated to the natural topology used and last but not least the device itself.
Deliverable power is minimal. And distortion increases exponentially as output power increases.
Click to expand...

Perhaps true of yours, but your generalization is entirely incorrect.
 
#2,690
fas42 said:
There are two factors at work: sometimes the hi-res version is mastered to come across better than CD, because it's "supposed to sound superior"; and often the implementation of the playback chain will favour reproduction at the higher bit rate.

I've gone through the exercise of stripping off the extra information supposedly in very high quality recordings, and there's nothing particularly significant there - mostly it's purely random ultrasonic noise, and short transient bursts just above 20kHz, at odd moments when a highly percussive sound occurs. If one just resamples CD material to whatever hi-res format you favour, you'll get 99.9% of the benefit that you can hear with these "special" reordings ...
Click to expand...
So the high resolution track contains more background noise, just like vinyl and it sounds more the same.😉
I never heart a diverence SACD normal cd. Only difference I hear is that they did a better job recording.
 
Last edited:
#2,693
Stefanoo said:
Overcome distortion caused by saturation of the core and especially hysteresis? Impossible, you can't! Also, Tube amp have mechanical noise associated which contributes to overall noise performance and distortion (micro-phonic). also they have a huge amount of second harmonic distortion associated to the natural topology used and last but not least the device itself.
Deliverable power is minimal. And distortion increases exponentially as output power increases.
I could go on and on...
Click to expand...
Please don't. You have already produced a good entry for the 'most misconceptions on one post' competition.
 
#2,695
It's been said many times before, but vinyl will always suffer from dust, poor storage and plain wear. If you could always keep perfect records then the vinyl would always win. CD will always suffer from poor mastering and over compression but at least the quality stays consistent.
 
#2,697
I don't buy that many CD's nowadays but when I do, I rip them to FLAC using EAC then put them away somewhere, the loft usually. I've been trying out some 24/96 FLAC downloads lately, not sure they are worth the file size for what little if any benefit I have heard so far. What is the point of something like say - a Led Zeppelin album in this format? it's so poorly recorded that it might as well be MP3 192 kbps. Far too many modern recordings are also too processed sounding, a wasted effort.

Instead of arguing with each other, maybe we should direct our venom at the record industry. Otherwise the point of having decent hifi equipment will soon be lost IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom