Vinyl vs. top-notch digital

Rushton,

thanks for posting that link to Steve Hoffman's findings. I've read his site, but never came across that one.

Fascinating that he thought a lacquer played back at both 45 and 33 sounded almost identical to the master, and that a pressing sounded so close to the lacquer. I would have assumed much more loss in fidelity at both steps. Nice to know that with a well mastered and pressed LP that we can in fact get so close to the master tape sound. I would have assumed that the open reel copy would have been the best.

For me it is a matter of economics. I've collected music since the day this buck toothed little kid forked over his allowance for Meet the Beatles on Vjay Records. I now have over 18,000 black diamonds and to replace them with CD's would be an expense that I could not incur. I would rather use that money to upgrade my analog front end which is what I'm in the process of doing. My digital Cd player is tits up,sounds awesome and I don't sit and compare it with my turntable when I'm listening to music,I mean if my foot is tapping or I'm being swept away by something breezy of airy as the tension from the day is being exorcized then it's all good. Just enjoy the music.

I'm presently in the midst of optimizing a vinyl setup in my system. I have spent 8k and tons of time optimizing my digital setup, at this point I'm very satisfied with digital sound.

Now I put the vinyl rig in, I started with a $3.5k setup, ended up giving up on that particular rig, simply not enough resolution compared to my digital. Two months ago went with another tt, started with about $6.5k investment, finally had sound that could better my digital. Since then, more upgrades, and more importantly, optimizing the entire setup (allignment, isolation, etc.), still, its not that much better that I'm ruined for digital sound. I'm now in the midst of further upgrades, $2.3k tonearm next week, a $2k cartridge next month, at least $4k phono pre next. I only point out the costs as an example of what you may have to spend to get your vinyl sounding better than your digital.

At this point in my vinyl evolution, I don't think there is any doubt the best vinyl sounds better than the best digital. However, I've found the better digital recordings still sound better than mediocre vinyl. I'm just a bit skeptical this will change with a larger investment in vinyl, I may only hear the deficiencies to a greater extent. Still, I'm open-minded about this, the upgrades I've made to this point have resulted in greater satisfaction with a larger variety of vinyl. I always expect sonic improvements to bring me closer to what I call, 'the breath of life', I already know that vinyl gives me more of this.

Now for some of the downside (as if cost is not enough) of vinyl for me. First of all, I hear very few speak to the issue of optimizing multiple sources within a single system. This is turning out to be a problem for me, I suspect I'll be working on this for a long time, perhaps I'll never be able to resolve it to my complete satisfaction.

Second, for some of us getting up and changing records every 20 minutes or so is distracting to say the least. I find myself going back to digital during every listening session (listening sessions can go up to 8 hours for me), as turning and cleaning records gets tiresome. With digital I get to hear up to 80 minutes or so of uninterupted music, which really allows immersion into the music. With vinyl, there are times I get a bad case of music interuptus.

While I love vinyl, there are downsides which are valid and real. Its not enough to say you have to put up more tinkering and fussiness. Actually experiencing this fussiness is a reality that imposes on the musical experience, ie. the enjoyment of the uninterrupted album or classical piece. Flow of music is vitally important to me, vinyl necessarily impinges on this flow. It seems rather ironic to me, on one hand, the sound of vinyl more fully allows one to listen in the mindset of a music lover, on the other, it takes away from that mode of listening by it's insistent fussiness.

As I sit here typing this I am listening to Joe Cocker played back form my hard drive. A recording I made with an inexpensive a/d d/a interface from my vpi scoutmaster ruby 3h. When I listen seriously I prefer and collect vinyl. Yet listening to this from my hard drive will still stop me in my tracks at times and capture my complete attention to the music. I think like many of the others the enjoyment matters more than the format. At whatever level you can afford buy what sounds good to you and stirs your soul or causes your foot to tap.

I'm thinking electronic music that is mostly digital or electronic at the source (and perhaps lacking in higher order harmonics?) works better in general on CD than vinyl (perhaps also with SS versus tube amplification) but "acoustic" sources with more complex harmonics that are inherently not digital can work better if captured properly on vinyl.

In the end, for someone who enjoys all genres of music from classical to pop to new age to death metal would be ill served by not leveraging both, though many still would not miss not having vinyl unless they already own a lot of records (like me).

Classical lovers and to a lesser extent jazz lovers so inclined to deal with the extra demands of vinyl may be able to get along without CD just fine if desired. Toss the more electronic genres in the pot and I think vinyl alone becomes a bottleneck that might limit ones listening options in a way that matters.

Technicalities, aside, I would just like to agree that its the music and whether or not you are able to enjoy whatever is presented that really matters and leave it at that.