"Digital ... don't got no balls!!!."

[maxg]

And this is a decent shot of his turntable:

[maxg]

and this is his cartridge (Insider reference from clearaudio - you dont get much change from $15,000 for this one - new):

[maxg]

and finally these are the supporting electronics - note the CD player and separate transport (Wadia) which is no slouch sonically in its own right.

[skaloumbakas]

Thank you for "advertising" me Max.

I just wanted to offer my poor contribution to this topic, with a paper I have recently writen in the ACA.GR web-site, comparing many music titles I have in both media:

http://aca.gr/rec05_skal1.htm

[Jeff Matthews]

I remember the old days when my room was full of LP's. They sounded good. Do CD's sound as good? I never really compared. It's not like I have a compulsion to go back and compare cymbal crashes. CD's sound good enough. If LP's sound better, so what?

CD's - smaller, cheaper, more durable, re-writable, more common, no flipping sides, players allow skipping songs and fast forward, most come with remotes. Need I say more?

It's hard to give up such convenience because you can go to an LP and hear a cymbal crash that just sounds more "real." They certainly sound far from "un-real" on CD's. In fact, they're good enough when you want all the conveniences of modern technology.

Of course, the same goes for all other aspects of music beyond cymbal crashes...

[garymd]

Jeff,

What's your point? You enjoy the convenience of CDs. That's great. So do I. I happen to also enjoy playing LPs and all of the hassle that requires. To me it's one of the more enjoyable aspects of this hobby. When I have a party and don't have time to flip LPs, I play CDs. Very convenient.[]

BTW - If you go back and read my initial post, the cymbol comparison was a response to a post saying cymbols on CDs sounded more realistic.

[jacksonbart]

These little bastards keep popping up.

[garymd]

LOL. You're killin' me.[]

I'm most of the way through side 1 of my original Columbia 6-Eye Mono copy of Time Out and I can't say I've heard 1 snap, crackle or pop.

Not that this has anything to do with the discussion but I have CDs scattered all over my house and in the car but if you ask me to grab a certain LP, I always know EXACTLY where it is.

[ygmn]

How about setting budgets for the source gear..... which sounds better??

Figure same amp, preamp speakers blah blah blah... are the same

but then set budgets of $200, $500, up to whatever....

for the CD player or Turntable with arm, cartridge LP cleaner crap etc etc Include interconnects to the preamp in this budget as well...and any other hocus pocus audio magic pixie dust ya need to make whatever sound good....

But at what INVESTMENT of $$$$ does a difference in sound occur?

and for Turntables the LP cleaning thing is in the budget....

Price of CDs or Albums are not counted in this example.... assunme they can both be bought at flea markets for 1 dollar each....

I mean..at what invest in LP stuff do you get this "suberb" sound?

If I was to give you $150 for either a

Turntable, cartridge, tone arm & LP cleaner thingy

OR

CD player

Which would you want to listen to for the same song?

At what investment do you think the LPs sound better?

To me it seems ya have to invest way too much $$$ into a turntable setup to get any return on $$ for better music......Maybe I am Cheap....

I will stick with my movies...since they do not sell the actual film copies for home use....and their is no Media type war....hehehehe

[LarryC]

Let's see now -- chopping up music into teeny-weeny pieces and reassembling it under strenuous limits and exactitude is nearly perfect, while analogue LP recording is so highly flawed that analogue recording engineers have no understanding of what it takes to sound good and thus make great recordings by accident.[]

Actually, it doesn't take that much of an LP player to sound good and outdo run-of-the-mill digital, so this debate is a little puzzling.

[wstrickland1]

All I know is, if I can figure a way to get Gary's TT and whatever albums he's letting go before someone else does, I'll be a vinyl guy again. I do remember distinctly in the late 80's when CDs started getting more and more popular hearing LaGrange on CD. Now, I had a decent TT and cassette deck and everything I had was LP or well recorded LP. Anyway, the songs sounded so hollow. I made those comments then and everyone said i was crazt. Hmm.

[kev313]

I remember the old days when my room was full of LP's. They sounded good. Do CD's sound as good? I never really compared. It's not like I have a compulsion to go back and compare cymbal crashes. CD's sound good enough. If LP's sound better, so what?

CD's - smaller, cheaper, more durable, re-writable, more common, no flipping sides, players allow skipping songs and fast forward, most come with remotes. Need I say more?

It's hard to give up such convenience because you can go to an LP and hear a cymbal crash that just sounds more "real." They certainly sound far from "un-real" on CD's. In fact, they're good enough when you want all the conveniences of modern technology.

Of course, the same goes for all other aspects of music beyond cymbal crashes...

And there you go. What a great example of "different strokes for different folks." That is basically the complete opposite of the way that I approach my 2-channel listening. For me it is, "If CD's are easier to use, so what?" Same goes for trying to get studio sound. I don't care what it sounded like in the studio. Hell, if it doesn't sound good in my living room it isn't worth anything. Whether I need a 300b set, a 500w solid state, a single full range driver, vinyl, LP, 8 track or RF7s and cotton balls in my ears doesn't matter. What does matter is that I like the way it sounds.

It is ludicrous to expect agreement on a topic like this when there are sooo many different ways to skin the audio cat.

[wstrickland1]

All I know is, if I can figure a way to get Gary's TT and whatever albums he's letting go before someone else does, I'll be a vinyl guy again. I do remember distinctly in the late 80's when CDs started getting more and more popular hearing LaGrange on CD. Now, I had a decent TT and cassette deck and everything I had was LP or well recorded LP. Anyway, the songs sounded so hollow. I made those comments then and everyone said i was crazy. Hmm.

don't ask, i feel stupid enough already

[pauln]

All I know is, if I can figure a way to get Gary's TT and whatever albums he's letting go before someone else does, I'll be a vinyl guy again. I do remember distinctly in the late 80's when CDs started getting more and more popular hearing LaGrange on CD. Now, I had a decent TT and cassette deck and everything I had was LP or well recorded LP. Anyway, the songs sounded so hollow. I made those comments then and everyone said i was crazy. Hmm.

don't ask, i feel stupid enough already

Nothing to feel stupid about - the object is to enjoy the music you like in whatever form, mode, source, media, etc. that suits your appropriate level of convenience, cost, and enjoyment.

I personally like pulling out a record, cleaning it, and cueing it up for a deliberate listen - usually both sides - always a whole side at a time. Others think that is crazy with the present technology that allows for finding and playing individual songs from a bank of stored music that rivals the Library of Congress.

I find that there is more variability in the musical content of folk's tastes in program material (how can this person be listening to that crap and liking it?), than there is variability in the mechanisms with which folks playback their music.

The only real stupid thing would be to forgo enjoying the music you like because someone said your playback system was inadequate or your choice in music was no good. Who cares what other people think? Musical enjoyment is a profoundly personal experience - no one may legitimately intrude on that space. Don't let them.

Pauln

[WMcD]

I'm coming to believe that injection of the correct harmonics makes a sound more appealing.

That could go on at the recording or microphone (probably not), the vinyl cutting process, the amp, or the speaker.

Maybe the K-Horns don't have enough distortion and a triode amp makes up for it.

= = = =

In any event, if one says digital has no gonads, is that just tallking about digital all the way through?

It is interesting to consider that some of our beloved music was recorded analog. I was inspired looking an "ADD" CD by DG. Much of older pop is done the same way I'd think. We have a digital record of an analog tape.

So, are such things good because there is an analog source? Or are they bad because they've been dumpted to digital? What happens if a digital souce is put down on vinyl. Of do we need analog all the way and anything else is bad because the digital process takes out a component?

.

Gil

[wstrickland1]

All I know is, if I can figure a way to get Gary's TT and whatever albums he's letting go before someone else does, I'll be a vinyl guy again. I do remember distinctly in the late 80's when CDs started getting more and more popular hearing LaGrange on CD. Now, I had a decent TT and cassette deck and everything I had was LP or well recorded LP. Anyway, the songs sounded so hollow. I made those comments then and everyone said i was crazy. Hmm.

don't ask, i feel stupid enough already

Nothing to feel stupid about - the object is to enjoy the music you like in whatever form, mode, source, media, etc. that suits your appropriate level of convenience, cost, and enjoyment.

I personally like pulling out a record, cleaning it, and cueing it up for a deliberate listen - usually both sides - always a whole side at a time. Others think that is crazy with the present technology that allows for finding and playing individual songs from a bank of stored music that rivals the Library of Congress.

I find that there is more variability in the musical content of folk's tastes in program material (how can this person be listening to that crap and liking it?), than there is variability in the mechanisms with which folks playback their music.

The only real stupid thing would be to forgo enjoying the music you like because someone said your playback system was inadequate or your choice in music was no good. Who cares what other people think? Musical enjoyment is a profoundly personal experience - no one may legitimately intrude on that space. Don't let them.

Pauln

NO, no, stupid for posting my own quote. I was actually going to edit it and I quoted it instead....DUH.....but hey, you are right about that.

[jdm56]

I love it when somebody drags out the old "snap, crackle, pop" argument. It's a sure sign that they've never heard a halfway decent vinyl rig playing decent records.

I do prefer it when someone will just admit that they don't find it to be worth the effort. At least then I can respect them for their honesty (even while secretly ridiculing them, as they obviously need a network upgrade...)

OK, I'll play along.

I don't find LP's to be worth the effort. I find them to be a royal pain in the keester, actually. All that record cleaning and anti-stat'ing before playing EVERY SIDE got to be a real drag. And don't forget cleaning the stylus almost as often, too.

And what was the reward for all this fussiness? ...snap.....crackle.........POP!

Oh, it's true. My rigs probably weren't "halfway decent" by today's vinylphile standards. The best one I ever had was probably a big old Pioneer from back in the late seventies, outfitted with a $125 Shure cartridge. I probably had $450 in the whole shebang. Not an unsubstantial sum to me then -or now, for that matter. But still, I realize that is not serious money in today's audiophile terms.

Everyone hears a little differently from everyone else. Our sensory perceptions are all unique to every individual. And while I honestly can't even begin to understand how anyone with functioning hearing could prefer the sound of vinyl records over the same music on CD, I would never try to cut that person down for their preference. To each his own, and all that rot.

Still, on purely objective terms no LP rig playing the best virgin heavy-vinyl can compare to any properly functioning CD player. That is pure and simple fact. Frequency response? CD wins hands down. Wow and flutter, S/N ratio, channel separation, distortion, etc, etc -no contest!

So exactly what, objectively speaking, does a record player spinning vinyl do better than CD?

[maxg]

"Still, on purely objective terms no LP rig playing the best virgin heavy-vinyl can compare to any properly functioning CD player. That is pure and simple fact. Frequency response? CD wins hands down. Wow and flutter, S/N ratio, channel separation, distortion, etc, etc -no contest!"

If I have understood you correctly you have never owned a decent rig and presumably have never heard one. If that is the case - how can you comment?

Your pure and simple facts are simply - wrong.

"Frequency response? CD wins hands down. Wow and flutter, S/N ratio, channel separation, distortion, etc, etc -no contest! "

For arguements on frequency response look at the recent thread on compression. Never mind what the medium is theorectically capable of - what do you actually get for your money?

Wow and flutter? What exactly do you think the difference is between a decent turntable and an old nasty? Could it be the elmination of wow and flutter?

S/N Ratio: what is the source material for this CD of yours? Could it be - tape? Guess where most of the noise comes from (on your example of pristine virgin vinyl). If it is there on the tape and your CD is faithfully reproducing what it receives then it is there on the CD. If it is absent from the CD then there has been some serious manipulation of the signal to remove it. I wonder what else was lost during that process?

Channel separation. What do you mean here? How is it that the soundstage of a vinyl playback system is so much larger and more credible than a CD based system? Don't believe me? Do take a listen to a good setup and report back. See if you can find one that can switch from one format to another quickly to aid your comparisons. Obviously having the same album on CD and record is a must here - but do several - we dont want people coming back saying that the one you chose was simply a poor CD.

Distortion? Not my experience. Remember we are talking about a decent setup and a virgin vinyl record here. Unless there was a fault in the manufacturing there should be no distortion as long as you have a capable phono stage that properly follows the RIAA equalization curve.

"So exactly what, objectively speaking, does a record player spinning vinyl do better than CD?"

Play music.

[Rivendell61]

Max,

Lots of confusion in that post. Maybe you are trying too hard to make a case?

There is a guy in NYC who specializes in vinyl mastering/laquer cutting, etc He says:

"I think the reason vinyl sounds good has to do with elegantly lousy specs. Looking for some superior spec to explain it is misguided"

I suspect most of us can agree that vinyl can (and does) sound very good--with or without a SOTA rig. And many will prefer the sound to other sources. Why not leave it at that and not undercut the positive with arguments that try to make it all perfect. Why not accept the "elegantly lousy specs"--it sounds good!

Mark

[garymd]

Max,

Lots of confusion in that post. Maybe you are trying too hard to make a case?

There is a guy in NYC who specializes in vinyl mastering/laquer cutting, etc He says:

"I think the reason vinyl sounds good has to do with elegantly lousy specs. Looking for some superior spec to explain it is misguided"

I suspect most of us can agree that vinyl can (and does) sound very good--with or without a SOTA rig. And many will prefer the sound to other sources. Why not leave it at that and not undercut the positive with arguments that try to make it all perfect. Why not accept the "elegantly lousy specs"--it sounds good!

Mark

Seems to me Max was just responding to the prior post. What didn't you understand?