Re: Vinyl lovers---please describe the reasons for your preference over CD

by musicmusic Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:20 pm

My, my, my, now why would the world’s most expensive turntable use a built-in digital processor providing RIAA correction, and complete time/phase cartridge compensation?

My, my, my how did they make zero jitter DAC? Isn’t it a distant dream? Also heard Naim achieved that too.

Vinyl going digital?

People can’t tell the digital touch?

This unrealiable information was derived from Google . It is available at http://www.goldmund.com/products/reference_ii

by **WongKN** Wed Jul 27, 2011 4:15 pm

You are shooting yourself in the foot la. If you try to belittle vinyl simply because it has some digital elements in the design, it is useful to bear in mind that DAC stands for digital to ANALOG conversion and there are LOTS of analog stages inside a DAC or CD player. What does that make digital ?

by musicmusic Wed Jul 27, 2011 4:59 pm

KN, I am not naïvelah not to know that end of the day the sound that comes out of the speaker is not digital.

I am postulating that if the maker of RM1million dollar turnatable thought it fit to convert the analogue signal to digital in their turntable than the argument about vinyl sounding more natural because it is not digital holds no water.

All the arguments about continuous sinewave, jitter or inadequency of sampling rate become irrelevant.

It is not digital or analogue that makes the difference.

If the designer of Goldmund cannot perceive any difference in the sound quality by including the digital correction in the analogue signal then the observation in 1984 involving Linn designer must be correct.

In the end, it seems that the vinyl recording itself is the source of the difference. Not because of digital technology limitation of 24bit 196khz.

Also of interest to note that the turntable analogue output is using D/A circuit. This is the same as straight wire vs AD/DC converter.

And I love my vinyl but as I have already explained in my earlier posts.

by sflam Wed Jul 27, 2011 5:35 pm

musicmusic,

i hv heard high end analogue and digital sources that sound extremely good.

for e.g.

1) the tad sacd/cd player which costs rm120k sounds very good.

2) an Artemis Labs SA-1 turntable, Schroder Reference tonearm with Air Tight PC1 Supreme cartridge also sounded very good.

are there differences in the sound?

there are, but they are not quantifiable and cannot be measured. and terms like "more emotional, more moving and more natural" are often used to describe analogue.

some people feel more emotionally moved by analogue, but how do you measure that emotional factor? some people say analogue sounds more natural, but again how do you measure that?

in the end, it's all about enjoying music (not fiddling around with the knobs). i listen to everything - lps (normal and 180gm), cds, audiophile cds, hi-res files and even mp3. it all depends on the mood.

by mugenfoo Wed Jul 27, 2011 5:51 pm

For the privileged few, they can afford to own a TAD CD player side-by-side with an Artemis Labs SA-1 with Schroeder arm and PC-01 cart.

But such extremes are not needed to highlight a point. Lets put a price tag of say RM8~10K for an analog front-end, vs. a RM50K digital front-end.

Then play the same album & same song track of the same artist. As long as its the same album and same type of music. Then one can decide which medium is preferred or whether they can or cannot hear the difference if that may be the case. I'm sure some of us here can easily run the above test without much fuss.

by WongKK Wed Jul 27, 2011 5:55 pm

musicmusic, your argument can be summarized as follows.

1. ONE high end turntable manufacturer uses D/A conversion for RIAA correction (ignoring the hundreds of other turntable manufacturers who are all analogue);

2. Therefore, "all the arguments about continuous sinewave, jitter or inadequency of sampling rate become irrelevant."

Does anyone else think that this is an unjustified leap of logic?

musicmusic, do you have any experience with an ADC-DAC? Something like a DEQX, TaCT, Lyngdorf, MiniDSP, or Behringer DCX. I have experience with all the above units with the exception of the Lyngdorf. I am wondering whether you have some actual experience to justify your opinions, or whether these are armchair opinions only.

by musicmusic Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:50 pm

SFLam, without a doubt digital and Vinyl sound different and I prefer them for the same reasons as astutely stated by Bimmerman.

MG, I agree in most cases I would pick vinyl but not always. And yes, I can always tell the difference. BUT you cannot compare apples to oranges. Goldmund’s TT is interesting because you can get digital output.

KK, I know nothing about all the items you mentioned. Never heard nor seen them .

But I know the world’s most expensive turntable manufacturer is now converting the signal directly to digital. You have to accept that fact. Digital is not as bad as insisted by vinyl lovers.

Just because you have used DSP it doesn’t change the fact that the most expensive TT is now converting the signal to digital without affecting the “supremacy” of vinyl sound. That is a fact.

I know they cannot be selling the most expensive TT if they cannot convince the buyer that it sounds as good if not better than other TT. I am sure the buyers are not upgrading from their Rega or Denon TT to Goldmund.

It would be nice if a learned and well blessed person such as your good self to be magnanimous in addressing the issues raised instead of questioning his credential or his financial weakness for not buying enough toys to be an expert.

by **WongKN** Wed Jul 27, 2011 9:07 pm

If I may step in as a moderator now, allow me to summarize, sort of, two crucial points -I think- I see from the contributors to this thread. I do think there seems to be an indication the thread is starting to go around in circles so it might be a good idea to 'clear the air', so to speak and then pick up again from here. I shall limit only to the question of whether vinyl-based or digital-based is a better medium for hi-fidelity sound reproduction.

1. There seems to be an 'accusation' (I use the term loosely here, it is not meant to offend anyone, just seems to be the word which can most accurately describe the situation) of two basic beliefs here:
a. Anything based on vinyl is supreme
b. Anything digital-audio is supreme

HOWever, I do NOT believe anyone in this thread actually made those stand. I do think that everyone more or less agrees that neither technology can be stated as THE supremo uno, and that implementation is more important. Also that each one has their own set of strengths and weaknesses.

2. There is a 'suggestion' (again seems to be the most appropriate word to use) that vinyl-based system is at the moment, supreme to digital-based system.

THIS I believe a number of forumers have stated their stance (and I would say including myself), each based on our own unique set if experiences, and our limited knowledge.

There are other things touched on in this thread, including the suggestion that availability of music is the most important, above everything else, which I for one supports wholeheartedly. But I want to limit ourselves to just the question of whether vinyl-based or digital-based sounds better here. So I believe the above two observations quite accurately summarizes the current situation here in this thread.

Perhaps we can 're-align' ourselves here, made a clearer stand on which camp we stand in, or in the case where I missed out, maybe other camps of opinions. Everyone is now welcomed to comment on this.

by **Hi-Fi 4 Sale** Wed Jul 27, 2011 9:33 pm

musicmusic,

Using Goldmund's analogy to justify the benefits of digital is a poor general example.

Consider this - When you place an A/D stage into a turntable designed to push the frontiers of sound quality (which is what Goldmund are trying to do), knowing full well that the signal reaching the loudspeakers will have to be analogue again, it goes with the assumption that one is either able to:
1. Make the A/D & D/A conversion process near-transparent, OR
2. Offset any eventual A/D & D/A conversion errors/losses with other intended benefits of first-mile upstream A/D conversion, transporting the signal in the digital domain for as long as possible and finally doing D/A conversion at the last possible stage (eg. at the power amp).

Just because it is a Goldmund, or (one of) the most costly turntables in the world, does not lend credence that adding an A/D stage will make it a universally superior-sounding turntable. Bear in mind that Goldmund's philosophy is close to what is described in Point 2 above, with the preamps & power amps designed to handle digital signals right up to the power amp inputs for final conversion to analogue at the power amp output stages. To them, the benefits of handling a 'long' digital signal path as opposed to the traditional analogue chain, outweighs the resulting A/D & D/A conversion errors from a turntable.

Then, there's the bigger picture where Goldmund are clearly focused on the future, where most things will be decidedly digital, which leaves the turntable as only a small piece in the final equation. Hence, do not judge Goldmund's action to use an A/D stage as the 'right' thing to do for everyone, it is merely to accommodate the turntable into their overall system philosophy.

If you use their turntable's A/D stage and then do D/A conversion via the conventional way; eg. DAC -> analogue preamp -> power amp, you will only reap the negatives and lose all intended benefits.

Lastly, not many have had the opportunity to listen to systems with Goldmund equipment. If you have, decide for yourselves whether you are inclined to their interpretation of sound quality and choose your philosophical path.

by WongKK Wed Jul 27, 2011 11:30 pm

musicmusic wrote:But I know the world’s most expensive turntable manufacturer is now converting the signal directly to digital. You have to accept that fact. Digital is not as bad as insisted by vinyl lovers.

May I ask if you have heard the Goldmund, and compared it to an equivalent turntable which does NOT do the analog to digital conversion? If you haven't, then how do you know that their approach is correct?

It would be nice if a learned and well blessed person such as your good self to be magnanimous in addressing the issues raised instead of questioning his credential or his financial weakness for not buying enough toys to be an expert.

I am sorry, but I am not going to mince words here. If you don't have experience with the products, then you don't know. Reading about something on the web is not the same as having first-hand experience with the products in question. Your opinion is uninformed and is therefore worthless.

BTW, the MiniDSP only costs AUD$200, and the Behringer DCX about AUD$500. If you want to try, you can. It's cheap. You can try for yourself that straight wire vs. ADC-DAC experiment that Tiefenbrun went through.

by musicmusic Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:15 am

KK, don't be too sure of your knowledge. Review, some of your own posts first.

Stop going in circles, just accept the fact the most expensive TT is doing digital.

I am just trying to point out digital is adequate and at the same time accept some virtues of vinyl.

It is you now have to convince why and how bad should Goldmund TT sound will be.

Face the hard fact, vinyl embraced digital.

If it makes you feel good, I failed my first year in kindergarten so I am sure you can fire me with expertise to prove vinyl is superior.

by mugenfoo Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:47 am

The fact remains: The most expensive DACs in the world with their fancy digital algorithms and DSP capabilities are only trying to strive ONE thing: RECONSTRUCT a better Analogue signal that is CLOSEST as POSSIBLE to the ORIGINAL SIGNAL (which so happens to be analogue in nature, in case anyone is wondering...).

This was in fact the BASIS for Wadia's patent in the first place. But just in case anyone here has never heard of this brand called Wadia, they specialise in DACs and Transports, and do not make Turntables or Phono electronics. If anyone is interested, do try Googling up this brand sometime...

Here's the preamble:
The present invention relates generally to the field of digital audio systems. More particularly, the present invention relates to a method and system for time domain interpolation of digital audio signals that will allow a digital audio system to more precisely reconstruct an analog audio signal from a digital audio signal such that there will be no perceptible difference between the reconstructed signal and the original signal.

http://www.patents.com/us-5075880.html

... 'Nuff said.

On the topic of Goldmund, ah yes...
Goldmund's reputation are really in the gutters lately anyways. Especially after they pulled this stunt and got exposed for the fraudsters that they are:
http://lampizator.eu/LAMPIZATOR/REFERENCES/Goldmund/goldmundizator.html

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/285743/goldmund-v-s-pioneer

So, its not surprising that Goldmud decided to spice-up its flagship Turntable abit, and just add in an on-board equivalent of a Behringer DEQ2496 and repackage the whole thing and then call it their SuperHyperDuper Reference Turntable. Of course, I'm just theorizing here in case anyone takes this suggestion too seriously.

Opps, sorry... someone here has never heard of Behringer either. Oh well, nevermind then!
Sleep

by WongKK Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:14 am

MM, nothing wrong with going in circles. We are talking about spinning black discs aren't we Smile

In any case, I am going to respect KN's call to move forward and I have nothing further to say about the Goldmund - except to say that I agree entirely with Admin's remarks about it. You seem to have very strong opinions about how transparent the ADC-DAC stage is without having experienced it yourself. I urge you to borrow a MiniDSP or Behringer and try.

Re: KN's post, I have already stated my position in a previous post: I think vinyl sounds better than digital, not because it is technically better, but because digital has not been perfected yet. Sadly, engineering resources are not being poured into improving digital because of the divide between audiophiles and audio engineers. Also, because the last attempt to provide hi-res audio was met with failure in most markets, with the exception of Japan.

With the exception of some boutique DAC's (e.g. DCS ring DAC, MSB ladder DAC, FPGA DAC's of EMM and PBD) - most new DAC's try to be more feature rich rather than focus on sound quality.

by **quintaruban** Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:26 am

i noticed - goldmunds table - isn't the most expensive turntable, so musicmusic do check again:)

by sflam Thu Jul 28, 2011 2:45 am

musicmusic wrote:
Face the hard fact, vinyl embraced digital.

that's a sweeping statement. just cos goldmund has included an adc does not mean vinyl has embraced digital. it just means goldmund has made a turntable that has embraced digital, that's all.

there are plenty of expensive, high-end turntables that do not have adcs for e.g. clearaudio statement and ultimate reference; continuum caliburn; transrotor; walker proscinium, etc; these are still very much analogue.

by **VS126** Thu Jul 28, 2011 7:58 am

WongKK wrote:

With the exception of some boutique DAC's (e.g. DCS ring DAC, MSB ladder DAC, FPGA DAC's of EMM and PBD) - most new DAC's try to be more feature rich rather than focus on sound quality.

Do you own most new DAC's to comment on the above or heard it in length or you just read it in review???

Maybe you shd buy or borrow some for indepth listening before commenting on it.

by WongKK Thu Jul 28, 2011 8:19 am

DCS VS126 I have friends who own all the above CD players, and I have directly compared my CD player with theirs. Is that good enough for you?

by **VS126** Thu Jul 28, 2011 8:33 am

I am referring to yr statement on most new DAC.

And by the way, those are DAC you mentioned and not CD player. How do you compare yr CD player to a DAC???

What about those DAC from Wadia, Jeff Rowland (the analogue king) latest DAC Aeris, Esoteric, Goldmund, MBL, Audio Research etc. Are these also bells and whistle and not much on sound quality???

Cheers.

by WongKK Thu Jul 28, 2011 8:41 am

VS126 I was talking about commercial DAC's like the Sabre DAC.

As for Wadia, Esoteric, AR, and MBL - yes I have friends with those DAC's also. The Wadia uses an off-the shelf Burr-Brown DAC. Not sure what the others use.

by mugenfoo Thu Jul 28, 2011 9:10 am

Guys, Don't get hung up on what "Brand" of the DAC chips are.
Many of them just use off-the-shelf DAC chips from Philips, Burr-Brown, Wolfson, AKM, etc etc.... and trying to generalise the type or quality of sound based on DAC chips alone is being narrow minded and just making a sweeping point (like someone we know here). There is so much more to the D/A process than just the DAC chip alone.

There is also the Digital Filter section and here is where you pay top dollar for. DACs from Krell, Wadia, Theta, Meridian write their own Filter routines. Other mfgs would buy as pre-written Digital filter routines that are integrated on-chip.

And then there's the receiver chip from the incoming SPDIF stream and the clock recovery methods which affects the timing/jitter of the D/A conversion process, or any implementations of re-clocking or buffering methods.

And then there's the intricate part of the ANALOGUE circuitry section and
this is another area that separates the men from the boys.

And much more other finer design aspects about building a DAC from scratch that I don't even know about...

Since someone mentioned the dCS method. That one is indeed a unique and patented method of D/A conversion that is very much in a class of its own and is not based on any commercial off-the-shelf DAC chips from the major chip makers. But dCS, coming from the Defence industry (then subsequently pro audio) background with specialised knowledge in signal coversions, they also write their own filter routines.

by **VS126** Thu Jul 28, 2011 9:22 am

It is not what DAC chip the engineer uses but more important is how the circuit is designed around it.

Listening to friend's system is not the same as having one in yr own system for prolong evaluation.

Not all DAC with Sabre Chip sounded the same. DAC chip is only a small part of the equation.

by adrian4454 Thu Jul 28, 2011 9:29 am

Yes Muggy, I think I have a new business idea for all the branded DAC maker out there. Please make 1 that can change/swop Digital filter like a plug and play, just like TT can change Cartridge(though this is not as Plug and play). And also allow user to play with the various setting the Digital filter have.. . It can be a very good new marketing plot~

Quench the thirst of itchy hand like us~

by mugenfoo Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:24 am

Adrian4454, go and have a look & feel (& listen) of the PS Audio Perfect Wave DAC. It has 4 or 5 (or was it 6...) filters for your to choose from.

Same goes for the dCS Scarlatti. 4 filters to suit your personal preferences.

Those DACs are too expensive you say? Ok lah, how about a Cambridge Audio DACMagic ? 3 filters for your choosing.

So it makes it worth your while to come to the big city once in a while. Come jalan-jalan and look-see look-see a bit (and listen) the shops here... Cool

BTW, just in case you didn't already know, there's a hifi show in some swanky hotel in KL this weekend also. You'll sure be pleased to know that your great idea has already been put into practice by many manufacturers out there and all you need to have it is to fork out some moolah. DACMagic is affordable right ?

by musicmusic Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:35 am

What!!!! DAC converts signal to Analogue?????
I always thought the signals going straight to my ears as 1010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010000110001111001010101001010

What a revelation!!! I should do more googling to find out about this revelation!!

Ok…now I have to go back and measure some PF of the wall.

by mugenfoo Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:37 am

U see... most people like to listen to their music via the usual manner
.. which is having the speakers create some physical sound waves thru the air, and then our human ears register the sound via the whole ear/brain interface (and we can safely recognise and be grateful to fellow forummer WongKK for lending his area of expertise in these matters and also relating it back to the art of audio reproduction).

Unlike some noisy whiner here that is ABSOLUTELY incapable of providing any insightful information or depth of knowledge or even any experience be it empirical or anecdotal, but instead just relies on subjective quotes and marketing brochures and what-nots via web searches (and most likely relying on all his mis-facts and some brainwashed marketing buzzwords).

So it would not be surprising that he probably prefers to listen to digital pulses directly hardwired to his auditory cortex. Must be the Best fidelity ever since it would be a pure Digital-to-digital (since he is of the opinion that his neurons are also all digitally interfaced) transfer from the CD directly to his messed up brain. (Here's the proof, by his own admission)

musicmusic wrote:What!!!! DAC converts signal to Analogue?????
I always thought the signals going straight to my ears as 101010101010101010101010101010101010101

So now, the MILLION DOLLAR question is ... just which hole does he stick the Toslink or the Coax cable up ? And it probably ain't the ears, since that part is "not Digital enough" by his standards...

lol!

by musicmusic Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:59 am

Yawn....

by Nil Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:02 am

Hey Mugen,

Do beware of the loser's Shit Shit words coming next.... Laughing

by hommie Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:05 am

I have done a brief comparison between:-
A P3-24 with acrylic platter and aluminum sub platter sitting on ceraballs/acrylic support + Pipit 22L - Antonio Forcione - Meet me in London (Naim)

and

BDP/DBA combo playing the same album but ripped in APE (44.1).

The Vinyl sounded better. Note However the digital format was not hi-res (I believe Naim does not have a hi-res version). My initial conclusion is that it always depends on the quality of your software. Nevertheless I still enjoyed both and its always about the music.

by mugenfoo Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:12 am

Nil wrote:Hey Mugen,

Do beware of the loser's Shit Shit words coming next....

Yeah ... that's only becoz that hole was not plugged up by the Co-ax connector to receive the "digital stream 10101010101010....".

Laughing

by adrian4454 Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:22 am

mugenfoo wrote:Adrian4454, go and have a look & feel (& listen) of the PS Audio Perfect Wave DAC. It has 4 or 5 (or was it 6...) filters for your to choose from.

Same goes for the dCS Scarlatti. 4 filters to suit your personal preferences.

Those DACs are too expensive you say? Ok lah, how about a Cambridge Audio DACMagic ? 3 filters for your choosing.

That make me sweat for a moment. Anyway, I am talking about swopping actual physical chips like PMD-100, DF1704(of course with it supporting cap, resistor, trans on a piece of PCB).. .. through DSP, fooling around with algorithm isn't that shok la...The labor of plugging and unplugging something physical is totally different from pressing buttons only.

And yes, I am going on this Friday~

by mugenfoo Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:26 am

adrian4454 wrote:Anyway, I am talking about swopping actual physical chips like PMD-100, DF1704(of course with it supporting cap, resistor, trans on a piece of PCB).. .. through DSP, fooling around with algorithm isn't that shok la...

If you've done DSP programming before, then perhaps you can appreciate that just 2 lines of coding can have a massive impact on the digital filter's characteristic and change the output sound dramatically.

by soonthas Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:32 am

There is no point to argue which sounds best between vinyl and digital, both have pros and cons.

Why not tuning your system to embrace the best of both, then enjoy the music.

by musicmusic Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:34 am

Mysterious girl always appear when someone is in on the loose.

The trend is glaringly obvious.

Wonder if one is the alter ego of the High tech reject.

by **VS126** Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:41 am

hommie wrote:I have done a brief comparison between:-
A P3-24 with acrylic platter and aluminum sub platter sitting on ceraballs/acrylic support + Pipit 22L - Antonio Forcione - Meet me in London (Naim)

and

The Vinyl sounded better. Note However the digital format was not hi-res .

wow, i better get that combination. P3-24/pipit

My Rega P9 with external Power Supply never sounded that good.

by hommie Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:53 am

VS126 wrote:
hommie wrote:I have done a brief comparison between:-
A P3-24 with acrylic platter and aluminum sub platter sitting on ceraballs/acrylic support + Pipit 22L - Antonio Forcione - Meet me in London (Naim)

and

The Vinyl sounded better. Note However the digital format was not hi-res .

wow, i better get that combination. P3-24/pipit

My Rega P9 with external Power Supply never sounded that good.

I was surprised myself but do note that it was a brief test. Been trying
to find the CD locally so I could rip it myself in WAV to run a more in
depth test. Hopefully I can get one this Friday. If not might just have to download the WAV version from Naim.

by **VS126** Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:02 pm

ARE you sure???

by mugenfoo Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:03 pm

VS126 wrote:

wow, i better get that combination. P3-24/pipit

My Rega P9 with external Power Supply never sounded that good.

i hope you're not using a NAD PP2 phono stage there... tongue

by **VS126** Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:04 pm

musicmusic wrote:Mysterious girl always appear when someone is in on the loose.

Must be on someone's payroll.

by **VS126** Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:07 pm

mugenfoo wrote:
VS126 wrote:

wow, i better get that combination. P3-24/pipit

My Rega P9 with external Power Supply never sounded that good.

i hope you're not using a NAD PP2 phono stage there...

No lah....FM Acoustic

by mugenfoo Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:13 pm

VS126 wrote:
mugenfoo wrote:
VS126 wrote:

wow, i better get that combination. P3-24/pipit

My Rega P9 with external Power Supply never sounded that good.

i hope you're not using a NAD PP2 phono stage there...

No lah....FM Acoustic

.. with Phono Linearizer !! No wonder! tongue

by **quintaruban** Thu Jul 28, 2011 5:29 pm

sflam wrote:
musicmusic wrote:
Face the hard fact, vinyl embraced digital.

that's a sweeping statement. just cos goldmund has included an adc does not mean vinyl has embraced digital. it just means goldmund has made a turntable that has embraced digital, that's all.

SFLAM - (Correct! bang on!)

there are plenty of expensive, high-end turntables that do not have adcs for e.g. clearaudio statement and ultimate reference; continuum caliburn; transrotor; walker proscinium, etc; these are still very much analogue.

by DrWho Sat Jul 30, 2011 11:51 pm

Digital source is better than turntable but it is the jitter in the digital system that almost always make the turntable system sounds better than digital system. There are only a handful of digital systems that can better a properly setup vinyl system. Very Happy

by cyh Mon Aug 08, 2011 5:53 pm

Wonder how this one sounds with the PP2? Smile

Vinyl lovers---please describe the reasons for your preference over CD - Page 4 Monach10

by cmboy Mon Aug 08, 2011 6:04 pm

cyh wrote:Wonder how this one sounds with the PP2?

What about the rest of amplification and speaker system? It not audible just on its own with some PP2 alone.

by Sponsored content