ChrisK Posted June 10, 2002 Share Posted June 10, 2002 While surfing through various Yahoo audio groups, I stumbled on the following link: http://www.anstendig.org/CDandDig.html It's a fairly heavy handed paper on why (the author feels) cd is inferior in audio quality to analog. There are other informational papers available on the home page, located here: http://anstendig.org/ Can somebody read, digest, and comment on this? Thanks, Chris ------------------ 2 channel Klipsch Cornwalls (1978) Cary CAD 300SEI amp (WE 300B's, various NOS 6SN7's) Arcam Alpha MCD cd player Accuphase T-101 Tuner Clearaudio Champion TT Rega RB250 ST arm (Six Stream wire and cable) Benz MicroAce Cartridge EAR Phono Stage HT Klipsch KG2.5 (front & rear) Klipsch KV2 (center) Klipsch SW12 (sub) Marantz SR7000 receiver Toshiba DTS DVD JVC SVHS VCR Sony Hi8 VCRs> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted June 10, 2002 Share Posted June 10, 2002 Fascinating, and I agree with most of it. SACD and DVD-A address some of the issues in this paper. However, the most important statement is not technical at all: "Unfortunately, that is almost universally the case, as most sound-systems are not capable of resolving enough detail to reproduce the musical experience contained in the original performance." True then, true now. Audiophiles with their finally tuned, highly engineered, high resolution systems are almost non-existent. The vast majority could care less, and will simply doze off if you attempt to tell them the dominant music distribution system and its billions in revenue is a straw man. This Anstendig outfit is also pretty strange. The stereo paper is, well, a bit over the top. While the logic is stream is fairly well constructed, it seems to suggest that stereo recording is an attempt to absolutely recreate the original space. I do not do that. I use two mics, and try to get a PLEASING sense of space that enlivens the listening experience. I certainly enjoy mono recordings, and have several hundred. However, I would REALLY miss the dimensional acoustics of St. Marks on the Biggs/Boys Choir/Tarr recording, and many other such experiences available to the listener. Nonetheless, I think I will read their other papers. Might learn something. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Average system component age: 30 years. Performance: Timeless Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisK Posted June 10, 2002 Author Share Posted June 10, 2002 Interesting you should bring up their statement about live music. This weekend I was at my 8 year old son's piano recital. It happened to be held at the home of the dirty rotten scoundrel that first introduced me to the realm of audiophilia. While we were listening to the performances (do re mi, Puff The Magic Dragon, etc.), he commented to me "...nothing like live music...". And damn, if he wasn't right! It occured to me right then that I was more interested in the sound quality than the musical performance. Am I a sicko or what? ------------------ 2 channel Klipsch Cornwalls (1978) Cary CAD 300SEI amp (WE 300B's, various NOS 6SN7's) Arcam Alpha MCD cd player Accuphase T-101 Tuner Clearaudio Champion TT Rega RB250 ST arm (Six Stream wire and cable) Benz MicroAce Cartridge EAR Phono Stage HT Klipsch KG2.5 (front & rear) Klipsch KV2 (center) Klipsch SW12 (sub) Marantz SR7000 receiver Toshiba DTS DVD JVC SVHS VCR Sony Hi8 VCRs> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barista Posted June 10, 2002 Share Posted June 10, 2002 Good Read. And I can see his argument. The main point he's trying to emphasize is that digital technology (at 44,000 times a second, with 16 bits of resolution (65535 points of voltage/amplitude (32767+, 32767-, one point being 0))) is incapable of sampling the full spectrum of audio that we hear. In order to truly sample our perceivable spectrum, including transients and combinations of frequencies would require a sample rate of 1Mhz. Analog essentially has resolution beyond the scope of our perception. So current digital technology will flub up various transients, where analog would fully realize them. Think of music as a painting. If you took a digital picture of a painting at 640x480, you will forever only have a image of 640x480 in resolution, where as taking the painting itself in it's true physical form, you will be able to zoom into an almost infinite detail of the surface, and the only limitation you will have, will be your equipment itself. Anything analog is infinite in it's resolution, where as digital will only take you so deep in detail before you hit a brick wall. So any master recorded digitally, it's limit will be defined from the start. Where something analog could always be improved upon. ------------------ Barista T. Bill --------------- Vintage Sony PS-T3 TT w/ Shure M97xE (Rega P2 & Grado Gold in wishbook) Sony 333ES For PreAmp (Building custom PreAmp W/ +-.2db RIAA Phono Stage) Sound Valves VTA-70i w/ Electo Harmonix EL-34 Tubes Klipch RF-5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenratboy Posted June 10, 2002 Share Posted June 10, 2002 CAN YOU SAY: 1984c>f>s> Things have improved a little... ------------------ Receiver: Sony STR-DE675 CD player: Sony CDP-CX300 Turntable: Technics SL-J3 with Audio-Technica TR485U Speakers: JBL HLS-610 Subwoofer: JBL 4648A-8 Sub amp: Parts Express 180 watt Center/surrounds: Teac 3-way bookshelfs Yes, it sucks, but better to come. KLIPSCH soon! My computer is better than my stereo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisK Posted June 10, 2002 Author Share Posted June 10, 2002 KRB, From what I'm told, things have gotten worse since 1984. Much more use of synthesized musical instruments, digital recording, etc., etc. Don't get me wrong, I've got some buckage invested in cd's, my player, and interconnects, and I still listen to them. It's just that, ever since I got my tt, the superior sound of vinyl has been undeniable. I agree the author of the "paper" is on a little bit of a rant. However, there is some logic hidden in there. Chris ------------------ 2 channel Klipsch Cornwalls (1978) Cary CAD 300SEI amp (WE 300B's, various NOS 6SN7's) Arcam Alpha MCD cd player Accuphase T-101 Tuner Clearaudio Champion TT Rega RB250 ST arm (Six Stream wire and cable) Benz MicroAce Cartridge EAR Phono Stage HT Klipsch KG2.5 (front & rear) Klipsch KV2 (center) Klipsch SW12 (sub) Marantz SR7000 receiver Toshiba DTS DVD JVC SVHS VCR Sony Hi8 VCRs> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skaloumbakas Posted June 11, 2002 Share Posted June 11, 2002 I have the impression that many people here are thinking of analogue like they are thinking of Louis Armstrong or Maria Callas; they discover old and dusty t/t's from their father's (trying to put them to work again). Well, it is not like that. Analogue has improved since 1984 A LOT, (possibly much more than digital...). There are Turntables in the market you would never imagine (do not overlook some Exotic DIY designs too!!!). So, do not compare digital of today with analogue of the past (although even this comparisson leads to analogue superiority most of the times too!) Enjoy the music Christos Skaloumbakas President of the Audiophile Club of Athens __________________________ web address: http://aca.gr/ e-mail: http://aca.gr/email.htm _____________________________________ My System: http://aca.gr/pop_skal.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted June 11, 2002 Share Posted June 11, 2002 Yeah, the article can do more harm than good at times. Christos, good point about the analog today. I doubt very few of the patrons in this forum have heard analog on a very good TT setup. It is FAR from easy to get right and if anyone has ever set up a moving coil cartridge with a fixed headshell arm and the protractor, being aware of VTA, azimuth, overhang, alignment etc, then you will know of the difficulty of getting this spot on. In addition, the cartridges are so damn fragile and $$$ it is sometimes hard to keep heart in check. The sonics WAX digital when done correctly on a good rig. And I listen to digital too. But the vinyl contains more resolution and air in addition to sounding more like live music. The relaxed nature of the sound, despite the artifacts, is the antithesis of digital. Indeed, vinyl, tubes, and horns present an amazing combination. Digital has improved greatly but is not there yet. Anyone that disagrees here has not heard what vinyl can do. Phono Linn Sondek LP-12 Vahalla / Linn Basic Plus / Sumiko Blue Point CD Player Rega Planet Preamp Cary Audio SLP-70 w/Phono Modified Amplifier Welborne Labs 2A3 Moondog Monoblocks Cable DIYCable Superlative / Twisted Cross Connect Speaker 1977 Klipsch Cornwall I w/Alnico & Type B Crossover system one online / alternate components / Asylum Listing f>s> This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 06-11-2002 at 08:16 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.