Have you ever heard a digital recording meet or exceed an analog recording?

MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

David Matz

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
928
Reaction score
0
Location
Wilmette, IL
Haven't been to this corner of the site yet. For the record, I am too lazy (and busy) to get analog equipment and I don't have the space for it at this time. But I am interested in your honest opinions. If so, which recordings? Anything non-SACD?


Not trying to make this another analog vs. digital confrontation, but just looking for facts and experiences.
 
"non-sacd" if you mean red book disc "standard cd" it can not even come close to an lp I know I will get bashed for making totalitarian statements but if you compare a standard cd to the same record their is no comparison in my opinion heck you don't even need side by side it just smokes it regardless anybody who has been over to my house will agree . I had not even truly heard my spires until I bought my first TT. I have a lot of cd's that I cannot get an lp for but I listen to them because I love the music but they just suck now in my opinion.sacd is by far a step in the right but look at the poor selection. a friend of mine who owns a record store has said many a time that he wished that all red books would have switched right over to sacd but it just never happened.


BTW this horse has been beat dead long ago
 
Last edited:
The most balanced, non-subjective answer to this question is that each medium has its strengths and weaknesses.

IMHO, a blanket statement that A is better than B is simply an opinion and not supportable. Way too many variables for that position to be taken seriously.

Given my interest in classical / jazz music, I would respectfully disagree that the musical selection available on SACD is "poor".

GG

PS As with most things audio, there are no absolutes.
 
Last edited:
The most balanced, non-subjective answer to this question is that each medium has its strengths and weaknesses.

IMHO, a blanket statement that A is better than B is simply an opinion and not supportable. Way too many variables for that position to be taken seriously.

Given my interest in classical / jazz music, I would respectfully disagree that the musical selection available on SACD is "poor".

GG

PS As with most things audio, there are no absolutes.

I 2nd that! :music:
 
The most balanced, non-subjective answer to this question is that each medium has its strengths and weaknesses.

IMHO, a blanket statement that A is better than B is simply an opinion and not supportable. Way too many variables for that position to be taken seriously.

Given my interest in classical / jazz music, I would respectfully disagree that the musical selection available on SACD is "poor".

GG

PS As with most things audio, there are no absolutes.
Great post!
 
The most balanced, non-subjective answer to this question is that each medium has its strengths and weaknesses.

IMHO, a blanket statement that A is better than B is simply an opinion and not supportable. Way too many variables for that position to be taken seriously.

Given my interest in classical / jazz music, I would respectfully disagree that the musical selection available on SACD is "poor".

GG

PS As with most things audio, there are no absolutes.

most of the strengths behind redbook cd's are centered around cost and convenience.just look at our systems cost and convenience really do not seem to be at the top of our list so why bother with these they never allow your system to really shine and that's why why do what we do.

sacd do sound good but he is talking regular redbook
 
most of the strengths behind redbook cd's are centered around cost and convenience.just look at our systems cost and convenience really do not seem to be at the top of our list so why bother with these they never allow your system to really shine and that's why why do what we do.
Fish , have you actually ever heard a world class CD player ?

I can bet that many would not know they are listening to digital on my system if they did not know it !

Synergy and World class players
 
Fish , have you actually ever heard a world class CD player ?

I can bet that many would not know they are listening to digital on my system if they did not know it !

Synergy and World class players

I have heard a lot of cd players such as the mark levinson and own a nice one I am aware of what you have C.A.P. but the resolution on those disc's is really poor you can not exceed the original source my friend. like you I was all for cd's even poking fun at the analog people until I got into it. analog is just a whole other world a good world with seemingly endless detail and 3d sound staging impact and coherency. have you ever set up a TT with your cls ?
 
I have READ on other audio forums, that properly recorded/mastered 24/96 (or 24/192) high-res digital tracks can sound as good as, arguably even better, than vinyl. The problem is there aren't many recordings of that caliber, nor enough supporting hardware right now to conveniently play it back on. My Squeezebox/Benchmark setup will downsample 24/96 and 24/192 tracks to 24/48 resolution, and even that sounds better than standard redbook CD's (comparable to SACD in my opinion). Kent Poon (www.designwsond), Cookie Marenco (www.bluecoastrecords.com), the Chesky bros (www.hdtracks.com), and others, are forging the future of high-res digital playback. I just hope the market won't collapse, as happened with DVD-audio and SACD's.
 
I would prefer a digital alternative but I want to enjoy today!
 
Fish - have you gone totally "analogue" or what?:)

I reckon that McIntosh TT would go nicely in your system... when funds permit.

In all honesty, I have some ace digital recordings, and some ace analogue ones. For some reason, the best analogue ones just come over with more emotion and humanity. And the best digital ones leave me pretty gobsmacked, but somehow they have a different emotional impact. As a musician of sorts, digital doesn't sound as real to me. Especially when it comes to the guitar. In fact, I will not play an electric through anything digital - I've tried it and it sucks. It's always trying to emulate the sound of tubes, and it NEVER suceeds completely. It does give a lot of versitality, though.

Both mediums can sound terrible. Let's not forget that.
 
Well put Justin....I agree !

I know David when you started this thread you didn't intend for it to go digital vs. analog........trouble is.......it always does !
 
I know David when you started this thread you didn't intend for it to go digital vs. analog........trouble is.......it always does !

Indeed...:) Where's Tim? Probably bored of making the same points over and over again. But he is "trying" to take a better view of digital:)
 
I would prefer a digital alternative but I want to enjoy today!

With a Transporter, or 24/96 capable DAC/USB input, you can enjoy that quality today!

I'm sure there will be a LOT more high-res streaming audiophile-grade gear entering the market shortly. I fully expect to be routinely streaming 24/96 (if not 24/192) by the end of the year.
 
Fish - have you gone totally "analogue" or what?:)

I reckon that McIntosh TT would go nicely in your system... when funds permit.
.

ya pretty much. I really like the vpi tables better I really do not like that plate thing mac has going on in the front of their tt it looks cool on their components and amps but not on this. it would have been a better design to put that meter somehow in the plinth so your hands would have more access to the table.
 
The only VPI I have ever liked was the TNT. Looked like a good design to me. Can't be bothered to check out whether they still make it, though.

Take your points about the McIntosh TT.

I really like some of the old McIntosh tube tuners... may get one someday.
 
You can't really compare unless you have the same source. And of course, that's impossible when we're talking digital/analogue.

In every system, either the analogue source or the digital source will be better. So how can you compare formats? You can really only compare personal preference on a given particular system.

...and that's what it is all about.
 
You can't really compare unless you have the same source. And of course, that's impossible when we're talking digital/analogue.

In every system, either the analogue source or the digital source will be better. So how can you compare formats? You can really only compare personal preference on a given particular system.

...and that's what it is all about.

the difference is not subtle its obvious. even on my fresco i's in my living room you can hear a difference!

no matter what the combo whenever the tt engaged it takes the cake! so its not a matter of analog amp this or digital that. mind you we are talking about only a $1,000.00 player with cartridge not some 10k riducalas model
 
Last edited:
When I've had the opportunity to compare an identical recording on digital and analog in my system, it's been awfully close, with only a very slight edge going to the analog side.

But at the current version of my system, if the CD is mastered better, it gets the nod (the current fleet foxes record, for example), when the LP is mastered better, (anything where I have an excellent remaster vs. a standard issue CD) and when they are both done equally well (say, the Frank Sinatra MoFi reissues), it's really close.
 
When I've had the opportunity to compare an identical recording on digital and analog in my system, it's been awfully close, with only a very slight edge going to the analog side.

But at the current version of my system, if the CD is mastered better, it gets the nod (the current fleet foxes record, for example), when the LP is mastered better, (anything where I have an excellent remaster vs. a standard issue CD) and when they are both done equally well (say, the Frank Sinatra MoFi reissues), it's really close.

come on man is that what you really think?

whats really close to put a number to it?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top