PNW audiophiles: Is digital ready for Prime Time?

Anyone interested in listening comparisons of LP's and digital playback may want to attend the PNWAS's next meeting on Feb. 10th on Mercer Island, WA (about 4 miles East of Seattle). Here's the address:

Mercer Island Congregational Church (in the basement)
4545 Island Crest Way
Mercer Island, WA 98040

Should be both interesting and thought provoking.

Anyway, here's the Official Blurb:

Is Digital Ready for Prime Time?

The club has many members who are dedicated vinyl-philes, and as many members where the CD/Music Server is their primary source. There have been endless debates on digital vs analog - theory and specifications vs "just listen". This month's meeting is not a debate on analog vs digital, but an exploration and discussion on state of the art in analog and digital playback.

As a basis of discussion, we have attempted to put together a system that is equally optimized for analog and digital. We will be able to compare high-quality analog playback with a pass through an ADC and DAC loop. While this is certainly not exhaustive, it will give attending members food for thought..... and whether with the system assembled, members in the acoustic space of the club meeting can hear the difference between straight analog, and analog digitized and then converted back to analog.

The system will comprise the following:
Roksan Xerses 20+ record player
Roksan Artemiz arm
MicroMagic Virus cartridge (with ruby cantilever and optimized contour stylus)
Burmester Top Line Ph100 phono stage with built-in 24bit/192hz ADC
Weiss Minerva DAC (plus mods by Gary Koh of Genesis)
Genesis SMc-1 Preamp
Genesis GR360+ amplifier
Genesis 7.1f loudspeaker

Members are encouraged to bring their LPs to play.

Ok, the event is over, but the results are still being tabulated.

I thought that it might be interesting (for some, anyway) to post what we were using for the "MUT" (Media Under Test).
So, in the order they were played at the meeting:

1. Casino Royale:, Side 1, Track 2: The Look of Love (Dusty Springfield) female vocal, audiophile reference (45 rpm, single-sided Clarity Vinyl)

2. Hans Theessink: Call Me Side 1: Late Last Night, Track1 Male vocal, guitar (33rpm LP)

3. Joe Cocker: Sheffield Steel Side 2, Track 1: Ruby Lee Dynamic blues/rock (First Pressing, numbered radio station promo)

4. Oscar Peterson Trio: Nigerian Marketplace Side 2, Track 1: Nancy with the Laughing Face Piano Jazz, live recording (Red Vinyl, first pressing)

5. Les Brown and his Band of Renown: Goes Direct to Disc Side 2, Track 1; Tickle Toe Big Band, lots of brass (Recorded Direct to Disc, pressed at Teldec, Germany)

6. Minoro Nojima: Nojima plays Liszt Side 1, Track 2: la Chanpanella, Grandes etudes de Paganini Classical Solo Piano (Reference Recordings, Prof. Keith Johnson recording)

7. Royal Opera House Orchestra, Alexander Gibson (side/track not stated): Gounod Ballet Music from Faust Waltz Classical Large Orchestra (Red Seal, probably second pressing)

8. Deep Purple: The Mark 2 Purple Singles - Side 1, Track 1 : Smoke on the Water (Live) Rock, very hard rock (Limited Edition clear purple vinyl)
[Terry's Note: I think this was also a single sided disc]

9. Ella Fitzgerald & Louis Armstrong -Side 1, Track 1; Can't We Be Friends? Jazz in Mono (Direct metal mastered Waxtime re-issue)

10. Hugh Masekela: Hope -Side 4, Track 1; Stimela World Music audiophile's reference (45 rpm Analogue Productions 180gm re-issue)

11. Edmundo Ros: Heath vs Ros, Round 2 Side 2, Track 1: Granada Big Band in Mono (Promotional mono version of the Phase 4 Stereo)

These were, without exception, very nice pressings from several of our member's collections. FWIW: One of our members owns the most complete collection of Decca pressings in the world. When Decca finds a record without the original cover art in their archives, they contact him and arrange for a copy to be printed from his.

Also interesting in light of those who complain about Vinyl sounding bad, I noted only 2 pops (total), during the time all of the above were being played. Not too shabby!


Best Regards,
TerryO

Well rounded samplings. I am assuming we can expect to see the results after they're tabulated?

mpholland said:

Well rounded samplings. I am assuming we can expect to see the results after they're tabulated?

Click to expand...

Only if they validate all my preconceived notions, fetishes and totems, as well as show me in an exceedingly good light!

I'm kidding of course. This was to be a "let the chips fall where they may" exercise and there was an awful lot of effort made to maintain a level playing field, in order to have (hopefully), an unbiased outcome.

Best Regards,
TerryO

Gary Koh has given out a short summery (which I have pasted below), with more to follow in the next few days.
Best Regards,
TerryO

We had great attendance - 28 people showed up, including some old members that we hadn't seen for a very long time.

We started with two cuts to determine that the system is actually transparent and had not been dumbed down. The better the system IMHO, the more of a difference we will all hear with two very similar LPs. So, I played two different pressings of Jazz At The Pawnshop that were very good - the all-white label German Teldec pressing Proprius did in 1992 and the Orange label first pressing done also at Teldec. Since the first reel was supposed to have been lost after the first pressing, we played Side 3 Track 1. I know that there is more difference between the two pressings on Sides 1 and 2.

I believe that everybody in the audience heard the difference, and the difference was remarkable with almost everybody preferring the Orange label.

The audience was handed out a sheet to mark their impressions. Three simple questions were asked:

1. Did you hear a difference? Yes/No
2. What difference did you hear? (including your preference)
3. Did you think A was analog/digital or B was analog/digital

Actually, it wasn't that they were listening to an analog source vs a digital source. What the audience was listening to an analog source (the LP). However, the comparison was between direct from the phono stage to the preamp, and from the phono stage to the preamp through an analog-to-digital-to-analog loop.

We played 11 cuts of music, and at the end of the night, 20 members of the audience handed back their responses. Two of the responses were blank - one said that no difference was heard, the other was too distracted by the great music. Many in the audience gave up after about half-way and just sat back to enjoy the tunes being played.

Some preliminary results:

The respondents explicitly said that they could hear a difference 51 times.
23 times, the respondents explicitly said that they could NOT hear a difference. (45 times if the two blank sheets were included)
Of all the responses, 87 out of 171 (50.88%) got it correct
The "trained" listeners did comparatively well - 9/11 (88.8%) and 8/11 (72.7%). Both were EXCO members and have heard the system and some of the music numerous times.
When a preference was expressed, 12 respondents expressed a preference for straight-thru, 14 respondents expressed a preference for the A/D/A loop. .

Interesting excercise Terry. The only thing I notice is that even in the best case scenario, the 'trained' listeners, while doing comparatively well, were not much better than results that a random guess could achieve.

It would be interesting to see if an ADC at 16/44.1 would have changed the results in any meaningful way.

dnewma04 said:

Interesting excercise Terry. The only thing I notice is that even in the best case scenario, the 'trained' listeners, while doing comparatively well, were not much better than results that a random guess could achieve.

It would be interesting to see if an ADC at 16/44.1 would have changed the results in any meaningful way.

Click to expand...

Hi Dave,

We tried to have about the best equipment available for the comparisons, and I don't think anyone would complain that the system we used lacked the necessary resolution. Basically, this isn't about the digital "media" as such. It only shows (or doesn't) if the associated equipment such as DACs, etc., is good enough to convert to digital and then re-convert it back to analog without sonic deterioration. With our set-up, it could be switched back and forth on the fly, while the music was being played.

I've heard decent 16/44.1 CDs, especially the JVC HDK2 mastered cd's which can give SACD a "real" run for the money and are still redbook compatible.

However, most redbook CDs are only so-so when stacked up against good Vinyl, or Hi-Rez digital.

Best Regards,
Terry

Cool comparisons and interesting results..

I have to ponder something here though.... If Digital is so great, then why to people include a DAC to make it sound more analog?

similost said:

Cool comparisons and interesting results..

I have to ponder something here though.... If Digital is so great, then why to people include a DAC to make it sound more analog?

Click to expand...

Because without the conversion to analog, it wouldn't sound very good.

But don't CD players already have a DAC? if so, then why the need to run through another?

Well, they are bypassing the internal DAC by using some version of a digital out under the premise that an external DAC may be better than the internal one, right?

huh... ok... Guess I could understand then why a stand alone DAC.. I didn't realize that was what was being done...