2. digital
  3. 1136402779

When is digital going to get the soul of music?

I have to ask this(actually, I thought I mentioned this in another thread.). It's been at least 25 years of digital. The equivalent in vinyl is 1975. I am currently listening to a pre-1975 album. It conveys the soul of music. Although digital may be more detailed, and even gives more detail than analog does(in a way), when will it convey the soul of music. This has escaped digital, as far as I can tell.
mmakshak
cdwallace
216 posts
 
Nil and Adhoc...I'll have to agree on this with you. When you listen to an LP (analog) on the same 2CH system and configuration as a CD (digital) 2Ch system, chances are you will come closer to live with the LP (analog). And I even know why. Because the "playing field" is uneven.

Digital is not optimal in 2Ch. Sad but true. This is why so many hate digital, because they can't grasp that it isn't optimal in this setup. It's horrible in 2CH.

However to level off the playing field, digital needs to be played in the configuration it was optimally designed for...MC. Otherwise your be chasing your tail each time. Let digital do what it does best and was designed to do, MC. Now things are more even!

When you factor this into play, LP's are a thing of the past! As for soul, digital has DSP's to take the edge off, amoungst other things.
guidocorona
4,114 posts
 
Ah yes, don't we all love TRUE BELIEVERS?
cdwallace
216 posts
 
Yes Guido, we do! About as much as we love glaring into the LED eyes of the system were "dating"...after 2.5 bottles of Cognac of course. Only thing is, digital won't result in a hangover or chaffing in the morning.

(The dating idea was yours, remember?) ;)

Hey next rounds on me, everybody! Drink til your liver hurls. :)
guidocorona
4,114 posts
 
Cdwallace, I'll drink to that!
mmakshak OP
583 posts
 
Cdwallace, great writing! Adhoc and Nilthepill, the latest Absolute Sound agrees with you. I just wonder about the economics of it. My APL Hi-Fi Denon 3910 cost me $2500 and beats my $10,000 analog(circa 1992). Now, my analog is old and not completely dialed in, but isn't that why digital was so successful to begin with? Most people didn't dial in their analog, or went with direct-drive. Cdwallace, I understand that you are stating what has been said previously, but do you realize that 5.1 has Dolby involved to make it work? I haven't spent much time looking at this, but I would think that if correction is applied, that the argument that digital is meant for surround sound would have some holes in it, if it requires correction. I have read that the harshness of highs can go away with surround versus two-channel with cd.
More to discover