I feel like causing some trouble today, so here goes. When the CD was first introduced back in the early 80's, it was heralded as the audiophile's dream come true: ruler-flat frequency response; ultra-wide dynamic range; no wow or flutter; no mistracking; no inner-groove distortion; virtually indestructible; and most of all, absolutely no background noise.
Now a virtual army has cropped up labeling digital audio as the equivalent of AIDS in the world of recorded music. Who'se right, and who'se wrong? Well, I'm going to take a giant leap here, and decidedly stand firm on the digital side of the audio spectrum.
Now that howls of protest have started to form, I'll explain my rationale. I own thousands of both LP's and CD's and have a number of CD's that are transfers of LP's that I still own. In making direct A/B comparisons between the two, sometimes the CD sounds better than the LP, and sometimes the opposite is the case. It is my sincere belief that digital audio has the potential to be the very best form of both recording and playing back music, but that it just doesn't always live up to this potential. Why? Because of the degree of care the recording engineers took while making the disc in the first place.
I am also a great devotee of classical music, and to me, this is where the digital medium truly shines. Not only can I listen to a symphony, or a piano concerto and not have to put up with endless Rice Krispies singing noisily away, but the dynamic range, depth and clarity of many of my CD's (in particular, Telarc CD's) puts the same piece on an LP to shame.
Telarc goes to great lengths to produce fine sounding discs, and over the years has steadily improved their recording techniques. A recent recording of Berlioz' Requiem, using the Direct Stream Digital (DSD) system is one of the finest sounding recordings I own, and puts an older, Vanguard LP to shame in comparison. The same is true of several Deutsche Grammaphon LP's that I once thought were stunning recordings, that now pale when compared to the same piece of music recorded on a Telarc CD.
To be fair, I also own a number of Decca (or London) CD's that are brittle and harsh sounding. Nevertheless, since the opposite is more often true when I listen to CD's or LP's, I think the fairest assessment is what I stated previously: Digital Audio can be, but isn't always, the best medium. When done poorly it really sounds awful, but when done well, it's all but miraculous.
My system is hardly a true audiophile's system as its total retail value is "only" about $10,000. Still, I have a very good CD player/D/A converter, and turntable/cartridge combo, and excellent speakers and amp/pre-amp.
I guess if I spent $17,000 for a new turntable, $3,500 for a new arm and $2,000 for a new cartridge, some of my LP's might sound better, but then that sort of cash outlay is in the realm of the ridiculous. For us mere mortals who spend more on their cars and homes than on their cables and interconnects, CD is, at least for the time being, the way for me.
Let the flood of angry, dissenting posts begin!!
Now a virtual army has cropped up labeling digital audio as the equivalent of AIDS in the world of recorded music. Who'se right, and who'se wrong? Well, I'm going to take a giant leap here, and decidedly stand firm on the digital side of the audio spectrum.
Now that howls of protest have started to form, I'll explain my rationale. I own thousands of both LP's and CD's and have a number of CD's that are transfers of LP's that I still own. In making direct A/B comparisons between the two, sometimes the CD sounds better than the LP, and sometimes the opposite is the case. It is my sincere belief that digital audio has the potential to be the very best form of both recording and playing back music, but that it just doesn't always live up to this potential. Why? Because of the degree of care the recording engineers took while making the disc in the first place.
I am also a great devotee of classical music, and to me, this is where the digital medium truly shines. Not only can I listen to a symphony, or a piano concerto and not have to put up with endless Rice Krispies singing noisily away, but the dynamic range, depth and clarity of many of my CD's (in particular, Telarc CD's) puts the same piece on an LP to shame.
Telarc goes to great lengths to produce fine sounding discs, and over the years has steadily improved their recording techniques. A recent recording of Berlioz' Requiem, using the Direct Stream Digital (DSD) system is one of the finest sounding recordings I own, and puts an older, Vanguard LP to shame in comparison. The same is true of several Deutsche Grammaphon LP's that I once thought were stunning recordings, that now pale when compared to the same piece of music recorded on a Telarc CD.
To be fair, I also own a number of Decca (or London) CD's that are brittle and harsh sounding. Nevertheless, since the opposite is more often true when I listen to CD's or LP's, I think the fairest assessment is what I stated previously: Digital Audio can be, but isn't always, the best medium. When done poorly it really sounds awful, but when done well, it's all but miraculous.
My system is hardly a true audiophile's system as its total retail value is "only" about $10,000. Still, I have a very good CD player/D/A converter, and turntable/cartridge combo, and excellent speakers and amp/pre-amp.
I guess if I spent $17,000 for a new turntable, $3,500 for a new arm and $2,000 for a new cartridge, some of my LP's might sound better, but then that sort of cash outlay is in the realm of the ridiculous. For us mere mortals who spend more on their cars and homes than on their cables and interconnects, CD is, at least for the time being, the way for me.
Let the flood of angry, dissenting posts begin!!
