The BLISS of returning to ANALOG: my experience

Hi Elizabeth,

I'm an analog fan from way back and I am happy that you've recently found your way back to the great sound of vinyl.

That said, If there's such a big discrepancy between your vinyl source and your CD source, then your CD source must not be very good or possibly outdated. These days, high end CD playback can be very close to the best analog turntable/arm/cartridge systems. My investment in my analog playback system is at least twice that of my digital playback gear and while I think that the analog has an edge -- it's more of a speed-bump than a wall. I think that if you improved your digital source you'd be surprised at how good CDs can sound nowadays.

Hey, if you want a real kick, go out and get a decent reel to reel tape deck and some prerecorded R2R tapes and compare them to your TT system. You might be surprised again...

Well, in contrast to Lugnut's experience, I've owned a VPI Aries with JMW 10 arm that I had a real hard time getting to sound as good as my digital gear and since then, I've had better luck with my Michell Gyro and Orbe SE TT's with a $4500 AHT phono stage. I use the Wilson Benesch Act 0.5 tonearm and Benz Ruby 2 and Shelter 501 II phono cartridges. My analog sounds really great through my Monarchy Audio SE-180 monoblocks and my Audio Physic Virgo II speakers. There's no question about that.

But I also have an old Parasound C/BD-2000 belt-drive transport and a Boulder modified Art DIO, which I use in conjunction with the Perpetual Technologies P-1A (as an upsampler), and a Monolithic power supply. Now, provided that everything is adjusted and working 100% in my turntable system, when I get the digital gear set up just right, with my proprietary blend of digital cables and isolation treatment, well, it's a very, very, close contest in many areas. Each may enjoy a small advantage here or there, but it's really almost too close a race to pick a clear winner. Of course that statement is recording sensitive too. It sort of comes down to the merits of the recordings under scrutiny -- how well they were mastered in their respective formats.

Hey, if anyone wants to bring a Linn over to my house for a shootout with my digital, I'd be up for it anytime. I guarantee I'll have you scratching your head for answers...

Hmmm... "One format plays music, one doesn't..." That's kind of drastic, don't you think, Dougdeacon? By the way, which one is which? :)

Lugnut, the beauty of this forum is that all of us are entitled to express our own views based on our own unique experiences. No one has called you a liar and you're certainly not in trouble. I totally believe everything you have contributed thus far. It's just that my own experience and search for the best gear (that I can afford) has given me different results from that of you and your friend and probably many others. It is through these kinds of differences that we learn and progress and I don't think that's such a bad thing. Heck, I used to be very anti-digital but with my present gear, I'm really enjoying it. With R2R tape, I now have 3 formats that are bringing me a lot of musical pleasure and if I can achieve that, then so can you and a lot of other folks. Why close your mind to another potential avenue of musical bliss? Just because you haven't found the "magical" combination for digital yet doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And it doesn't have to be that expensive.

How many times have you gone to an audio demonstration where there are both digital and analog sources, both decent quality, and yet one blows the other away. I've seen it happen plenty of times. Sometimes, sadly, it is the analog that suffers in the comparison -- even when the equipment is good. Personally, I just chalk it up to someone not taking pains to optimize the performance of one of the formats and discount the results as meaningless. To draw concrete conclusions from experiments that are not conducted fairly, with strict controls over the variables is folly. Peace!