Why should one medium sound better than another?

[guest102]

It's a shame today's playback formats and portable equipment options weren't around back in the '60s. When everybody had been suitably conditioned and was out dancing in the moonlight it all would have sounded equally good.:guitar:

 

[bluesky]

If I got that sort of "feeling" from lps, I would spin records a whole lot more than I do. You are describing something completely subjective, so your whole point about it being undeniable is debatable.

My experience is different. I have concluded that vinyl and cd are just storage mediums, nothing more. And, there is nothing magical about either. Both can sound good or bad, but neither is perfect. If the mere fact of analog made a format better, one would expect more people listening to Reel to Reel, cassettes and 8 tracks as well.

I have spun records on everything from cheap BSR tables, to mediocre 80s era JVCs and Technics, to better quality Regas and ProJects, to really good Linns, Sotas, Nottinghams and Acoustic Solid. You know what? An lp still sounds like an lp. A beat up old mid to late 70s pressing of Zeppelin still sounds like crap, even on a $10,000 turntable, playing into a $5,000 phono stage. I have heard it. Even with a great pressing, which I have also heard, the music is good, but it still sounds like an lp to me. It never quite puts you in the studio with the musicians.

As luck would have it, I have been listening to some Led Zeppelin recently on cd, mostly the 80s era reissues mastered by Barry Diament. You know what? It sounds pretty much as I remember the old lps, except for the lack of surface noise and the inner groove distortion. Nice, early to mid 70s studio sound.

Great!! So we 'both agree' LPs 'sound and feel' way better than CDs!!!!! :>)
(only joking! lol)

I agree with both of you. My experience with LPs vs. CDs is similar to Bluesky's. I find that when I play a CD, I get antsy for it to be over after a few songs. When I play an LP, I get engaged in the music and I'm disappointed when it comes to an end. I agree, though, that this is completely subjective and therefore not undeniable except for me in my room with my rig and my ears.

There are a tremendous number of AKers who's opinions I respect who feel that with the proper digital front end CDs can provide the same (or better) experience as LPs. I acknowledge that my digital front end is sub par and I'd like to improve it so that my CDs do something more than gather dust.

"I find that when I play a CD, I get antsy for it to be over after a few songs. When I play an LP, I get engaged in the music and I'm disappointed when it comes to an end".

JonL: That's 'exactly' the way I feel! And I've never heard it said that way, but 'that's it'. I can't get 'engaged' in CDs no where near as much as LPs. Period. CDs are great to listen to, but no real 'engagement'.

I must admit one thing, I got a new NAD CD player reciently and CD players have come a long way since the last time I bought one. Sound quality has drastically improved. But still...'not engaged' to the music as I am with an LP.

Guess it's just comes down to personal preference and what you want out of your medium.

 

[mrt2]

Great!! So we 'both agree' LPs 'sound and feel' way better than CDs!!!!! :>)
(only joking! lol)





"I find that when I play a CD, I get antsy for it to be over after a few songs. When I play an LP, I get engaged in the music and I'm disappointed when it comes to an end".

JonL: That's 'exactly' the way I feel! And I've never heard it said that way, but 'that's it'. I can't get 'engaged' in CDs no where near as much as LPs. Period. CDs are great to listen to, but no real 'engagement'.

I must admit one thing, I got a new NAD CD player reciently and CD players have come a long way since the last time I bought one. Sound quality has drastically improved. But still...'not engaged' to the music as I am with an LP.

Guess it's just comes down to personal preference and what you want out of your medium.

It all depends what your benchmark is, both for lps and cds. While NAD is no slouch as a digital source, but it is still pretty much an entry level cd player. At least be aware that better hardware exists.

 

[bluesky]

I'm suprised because everyone knows that NAD is the best equipment in the world!! :>)

I know that there are remarkable CD players out there if you want to pay the price. I can't imagine how great they do sound but I bet they do sound awsome.

I had 2 CD players, both older models, a Sony (which I really did like - at the time) and a Denon (which wasn't cheap but I never really did like that CD player very much, Rarely used it, then I did and it crashed and chewed up my Jimmy Page 24k 'Deathwish' CD. The CD still works fine, just all scratched up. Wonderful!

Well, both crashed within 2 weeks of the other (go figure) so I needed a new CD player. After some reasearch I ended up getting a NAD C-515BEE for $300. I was, and still am, very suprised at how much better CD players have progressed in sound quality now-a-days. It really sounds really good. I was 'very suprised' actually. I know NAD seems to have a rep for malfunctions when new. I just took the chance because of the terrific write-ups in the stereo mags and it worked out fine. It sounds great. Perfect for my needs. Way beyond what I thought it would be. I can only imagine how the more expensive CD players sound.

In all honesty: One thing I did notice 'immediately' was that with this new NAD unit the CDs did start sounding more like LPs. Got to give it credit for that! The CD musical sounds are more pleasing, if that makes any sense. Just makes CDs sound better in every way. And musically, sound, a big improvement over the older units.

I spin records 2/3rds of the time so the NAD CD player is perfect for my needs.

One NAD CD player...$300. One new Ortofon TT cartridge and new headshell wire leads...$300. What can ya say. :>)

Gotta love it!

 

[blackfly]

I think the question is unfair. It forces someone to admit one format is best and the others inferior, but sonic performance is, ultimately, subjective to the listener.

I prefer CD's. I have a good CDP. The rest of my system ensures I get the most from it. Sound is fantastic. But a LP fan, born and raised as LP's as the medium of choice will see it different.

Most cannot understand that the answer has emotional and perceptive elements to it. I have a cassette of a compilation from the early 80's (Masters of Metal vol I and II) that has so much emotional appeal to me, despite being well worn, I cannot get the same reaction (goosebump phenomenon) from a well mastered CD, despite the fact I have all the songs on disc. Moreover, I find it funny that despite my system I get far more GBP (goosebump phenomenon) from listening to the car radio (stock) or whenever a song is played at the right moment when the mood is right, or illicits a memory that is long buried. Music is not like engine performance where it is readily measured, and can be reproduced and easily understood from performance. Subtlety is a facet of music, and you rarely, if ever, hear of it in car/engine comparisons.

I have my personal opinions, but in the end, so long as one stays a music lover and a audiophile, whatever method they choose to remain a defender of the faith, fine by me.

 

[blackfly]

.1. In the digital format you say: "That sounded really nice. What's the next CD?"
2. In the analog format you don't say anything, after the LP finishes 'you feel like goin wild', goin downtown, and doin some partying! Straight up.

That's the difference to me anyway. Something 'is' goin on there. "It's .

I think your analogy is forgetting contextual meaning. When you remember the LP scenario you were young, full of P+V, perhaps other substances, and the world was seen through a rosy lens. In the CD version you are in the here-and-now, a bit jaded, older for sure, and look back with typical nostalgic fondness. I know, I do it too.

But do not think that I do not get the "soul food" from CD's... I do. Often. And I am not the only one. Soul is not a part of the medium, but the music, which heard in any way gives me that deep inner glow.

 

[Fopp]

Soul is not a part of the medium, but the music, which heard in any way gives me that deep inner glow.

Ah yes, the music.

Sitting on a bus to DC now, listening to Dirty Projectors on my iPod. It's a very engaging album. Gets me feeling all fuzzy inside. Has a great Nico cover too.

 

[mrt2]

I think your analogy is forgetting contextual meaning. When you remember the LP scenario you were young, full of P+V, perhaps other substances, and the world was seen through a rosy lens. In the CD version you are in the here-and-now, a bit jaded, older for sure, and look back with typical nostalgic fondness. I know, I do it too.

But do not think that I do not get the "soul food" from CD's... I do. Often. And I am not the only one. Soul is not a part of the medium, but the music, which heard in any way gives me that deep inner glow.

I'll buy that. It still doesn't explain why some teens and twenty somethings like lps.

I especially agree that the soul is in the music, not the medium.

 

[Fopp]

I'll buy that. It still doesn't explain why some teens and twenty somethings like lps.

I'm 23. I'll explain it by using generalizations. We like anything that is vintage, because vintage is cool. We grew up with CDs, so when we see a larger presentation of album art, we like that. Many of us still think vinyl sounds warm, and we dig that too, even though it really isn't true. We find physical satisfaction in the process of playing a record, it's a novelty to us (we grew up with CDs).

Vinyl is just way more fun than CDs or mp3s. Duh.

 

[mrt2]

I'm 23. I'll explain it by using generalizations. We like anything that is vintage, because vintage is cool. We grew up with CDs, so when we see a larger presentation of album art, we like that. Many of us still think vinyl sounds warm, and we dig that too, even though it really isn't true. We find physical satisfaction in the process of playing a record, it's a novelty to us (we grew up with CDs).

Vinyl is just way more fun than CDs or mp3s. Duh.

I figured it was something like that.:thmbsp:

 

[kevzep]

Ive read through these posts and it seems the same old digital vs analogue topics come up. The most interesting one is from JonL talking about emotional engagement to an LP as opposed to a CD...........Yeah I kinda get that, I have something like that going on when I hear an LP, but I think it has somethng to do with the familiarity and comfort of listening to the music they way we always have...........Its the whole vinyl ritual and the belief that it is better, now in certain instances I believe it is better, but not always.
I find if I have heard the music on both LP and CD I nearly always prefer the LP, but if I have never heard the music Im listening to on LP then I dont have a reference to form a comparrison with, so I take it for what it is.
Most arguments I see against CD's seem to be refering to earlier CD mastering and production, when it was in its infancy, which I think is a little unfair, there are some great and engaging recordings on CD as there are on LP.
I have said this before, but I will say it again, an average CD player/CD is going to sound better than the Average Turntable/LP setup. Better in dynamic range frequency response and reliability.
The current digital technology will rival analogue, and its only going to keep getting better, and frankly Im making use of it, by recording some of my LP's at 96khz/24bit, and this is how I play it back, I use a firewire outboard proffessional soundcard.
Im lucky enough to be able to experience 192khz/24bit protools HD, this technology, will and does rival tape, its very difficult to hear any difference.
Whereas in its infancy it was easy to hear the difference...........
But look Im still an advocat for analogue, its familiar to me and familarity brings comfort, and I like that when im dealing with music, but then sometimes Im practical, and thats when i go into digital mode............

 

[bluesky]

Both mediums, CD and LP, have thier advantages and disadvantages.

Excellent TT, $200-250 cartridge, the right componets interwoven, everything adjusted, excellent LP...I'd much rather listen to the LP, of course.

But yes, for the 'average person' CDs are wonderous, the only way to go. Simple...pop the CD in, sit back, and listen to good music without 'wow and flutter, easy, no attachment. Just change CDs and put them back in the little plastic cases when done.

Turntable guys have a 'little special thing goin on'. It takes time, knowledge, $, and patients to 'get things right'. But when they are right and everything is lined up to the Stars and Universe...LPs ' feel - sound - whatever ' so much better than CDs. No comparison to me. Pretty much all the TT guys 'feel' that. Otherwise we wouldn't be doin it!

But...we are in a minority for sure. Glad about that, otherwise I couldn't of purchased my latest sealed LP: Robert Palmer's 'Riptide' for 99 cents! :>)

But hey...It's no problem that I just spent $60 on a new OEM headshell, $200 for a new NOS Ortofon cart, $30 for new headshell wire leads...I got the 'sealed' album for 99 cents!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL :>)

Time to get up again!...and turn the LP over!! It's all good and fun!

CDs are good. Big advantages for the majority of main stream folks for sure and they have excellents 'sounds'. It's easy and...it's easy. And no wow or flutter, snap, crackle, or pop. Guess for them CDs are totally where it's at. I can understand where they are coming from, but they just can't understand TTs. At all. TTs and records are, to me anyway...'fun' and they sound great. It's a fun and rewarding medium.

 

[Mr. Lin]

I know that there are remarkable CD players out there if you want to pay the price. I can't imagine how great they do sound but I bet they do sound awsome.

Yes, they do.

I just can't help having the same thought as I read through this thread: we're never going to settle the "debate" about which format is better, because there's too much subjectivity involved. You know what I think would be a refreshing change? A thread in which we talk about the things we love about digital and analog, what their strengths are. Can't we all just get along?

 

[kevzep]

Yes, they do.

I just can't help having the same thought as I read through this thread: we're never going to settle the "debate" about which format is better, because there's too much subjectivity involved. You know what I think would be a refreshing change? A thread in which we talk about the things we love about digital and analog, what their strengths are. Can't we all just get along?

Yeah man, I agree. Im torn apart with these threads because I like both, I have both and regularly use both......................

 

[niklasthedol]

I know that there are remarkable CD players out there if you want to pay the price. I can't imagine how great they do sound but I bet they do sound awsome.

CD players are limited in the quality of sound by the REDBOOK standard behind the media.
16 bit / 44.1 kHz sampling.
Even a good Cassette player can beat that.
In particular within the parameter of how natural it sounds.

"dolph"

 

[kevzep]

CD players are limited in the quality of sound by the REDBOOK standard behind the media.
16 bit / 44.1 kHz sampling.
Even a good Cassette player can beat that.
In particular within the parameter of how natural it sounds.

"dolph"

Even so, having high quality converters can make huge differences not to mention high quality word clocks, I imagine thats what expensive CD players have as opposed to cheap and nasty word clocks and converters.
Those things make HUGE improvements do digital audio.
With all due respect I doubt very much whether a cassette could compete with that kind of digital resolution.
But by all means, show us some proof, Im keen to study your claim.

 

[niklasthedol]

Even so, having high quality converters can make huge differences not to mention high quality word clocks, I imagine thats what expensive CD players have as opposed to cheap and nasty word clocks and converters.
Those things make HUGE improvements do digital audio.
With all due respect I doubt very much whether a cassette could compete with that kind of digital resolution.
But by all means, show us some proof, Im keen to study your claim.

With the audition of several very high end CD players up to more than $40.000 + a lot of pro studio equipment compared to Tandberg TCD 3014/A TCD 910, I am not a second in doubt.

Of course it takes a great matched system to audition the differences.

Go ahead and get convinced.
;-)

"dolph"

 

[kevzep]

With the audition of several very high end CD players up to more than $40.000 + a lot of pro studio equipment compared to Tandberg TCD 3014/A TCD 910, I am not a second in doubt.

Of course it takes a great matched system to audition the differences.

Go ahead and get convinced.
;-)

"dolph"

What kind of tape do you think?
I have a Fostex E2 1/4inch tape machine (immaculate) which I am quite fond of, there is "something" about the sound of that which makes me feel good.

 

[niklasthedol]

What kind of tape do you think?
I have a Fostex E2 1/4inch tape machine (immaculate) which I am quite fond of, there is "something" about the sound of that which makes me feel good.

I have a Lyrec PTR-1 Frida Open Reel Deck.

But we were actually talking cassette deck here.
I prefer Scotch Metal or some Maxell Cr. tape for that.

"dolph"

 

[marc mc]

CD players are limited in the quality of sound by the REDBOOK standard behind the media.
16 bit / 44.1 kHz sampling.
Even a good Cassette player can beat that.
In particular within the parameter of how natural it sounds.

"dolph"

That really is the story and it was the language that we used when CD's came out. It was the brickwall filters that limited CD from that extra thing that vinyl seemed to have. I had heard most of the monster tables before I heard CD's and I knew they were not what had been claimed. They were a mainstream product directed by Sony and Phillips who lets face it have never been know to think outside the mass market appeal products.

I had thousands of albums so I continued to use vinyl plain and simple. The high end audio community worked night and day to erase TT's and vinyl form the face of the earth as the crowd had embraced the new medium. Flash forward to today and CD's sound very good I have a fantasitc collection of both vinyl and shiny discs and love them both.

I guess it boils down to context and what you've heard. Nik is right though about what the real problem was with CD's. The medium was released when it could satisfy the ears of the mainstream and not the audiophile. Had they waited and gone with a higher standard the death of vinyl would have been total and complete. I wish they had waited until an LP sounded like an 8 track player compared to a CDP. But it was about money and not sound. Sony was not interested in selling the medium. They wanted to sell the discs, LP sales were in the toilet and people were tired of the fragility of tapes in their cars. So presto along comes a medium that is portable and "near indestructable" or so they said.

Today I see CDP's in between. Just below the monster tables and far better than the Duals and TD160's. And with the exception of the Denon DL103 I have not heard a sub $400 cart that will get even close to my Creek CDP.

marc mc