Is Digital actually better than Analog?

It depends on what you prefer - both can produce excellent sound.

Andrew, enjoy your DV-50S and let sleeping dogs lie.

Having owned your DV-50S, yes, analog is better, no question. However, it does take much more work to set up properly, and keep the LP's clean.

If you have any doubt's, drop by again, when I have time, and I'll be happy to demo my analog rig. :-)

Cheers,
John

My goal is to have both analog and digital rigs sound as close to each other as possible. I've done it. People say my LPs sound like CDs and the CDs like LPs. Although I have three times more albums than CDs the high cost of used LPs readily available on CD drove me in this direction.

I use a Dan Wright modded Parasound belt drive transport and a KAB modded Technics 1200. The CIA DAC and Monolithic Sound phonostage are from the same designer (Dusty Vawter), thus having similar sonic signatures. I rely on a modified Stanton Trackmaster DJ cartridge for bass slam, superior trackability/dynamics and fluid, edge free harmonic midrange. The belt drive's power supply was re-engineered to provide glare free transient response and three dimensional imaging usually wanting in most digital systems.

Both formats have strengths and weaknesses. As the inherent weaknesses of each format are properly addressed analog and digital get closer to the same destination...music.

With psychic power and primal intensity,

Digital vs analog is something of a religious debate in audio. In my opinion both have strengths and weaknesses, and, unless you already have a sizeable collection of LPs it is not worthwhile to purchase an analog setup (turntable, phono pre-amp) ... spend the money on CDs or a better CD player instead. (I have a CD player and a turntable, but I also have a sizeable collection of LPs).

i recently swore off digital verses vinyl threads. i took the 12-step 'cure' (compared 12 Lps to digital). who the hell cares what anyone thinks anyway.

you guys have fun.