1. Home
  2. analog
  3. 1161719631

Analog experiment

Hi everyone. Some of you will remember my post from a couple weeks back about trying out vinyl. My dealer setup that old AR for me and I listened to it for a while and then listened to the same records on a new Pro-Ject RM 6 SB with a Sumiko Blue Point #2 cartridge. I liked the Pro-Ject better so I took it home for an audition in my system.

I borrowed some basically new LPs from my dealer's collection. Most of them are the 180 gm. "audiophile grade" limited editions. I got U2 War, Eagles Hell Freezes Over, John Lee Hooker, Pink Floyd DSOTM and REM Document. I was familiar with all these and own the CD counterpart of each album for direct comparisons.

I carefully setup the turntable making sure it was level. My dealer has been selling turntables for decades so I trust the other adjustments. I used the C42 to level-match the outputs of my Sony C333ES SACD player and the Pro-Ject, again for fair direct comparisons.

I listened to each album on its own on the turntable and then I went back and played the Sony in parallel. I switched between the two sources from my listening chair. In this case, I would keep the turntable 40 seconds ahead of the Sony so every 40 seconds I could hear the exact same passage in digital form. Hearing memory is short so I kept the interval short. I also made longer comparisons to be sure of my thoughts.

The bottom line is that the Pro-Ject didn't sound any better than my Sony. They had exactly the same tonality and soundstaging. On DSOFTM in SACD, the Sony was virtually indistinguishable from the turntable. I couldn't believe it. This is the first time I can't hear a reliable difference between two different components.

With other records, the turntable seemed to have a slightly more extended and weightier bottom end. But then the Sony had slightly better definition so it was a wash. After these tests, I see no reason for me to go with vinyl. You think maybe the phono stage in my C42 isn't good enough? Or maybe the turntable should be a better one? Well then, I am even less interested in vinyl if that is the case. The Sony costs about $350 these days.

I am sure some of you will be upset with my decision but I have to say I was excited to try it out and I kept my outlook totally unbiased. I loved the looks of the Pro-Ject and my dealer has an awesome collection of vinyl for sale at really good prices so I wanted to tap into that. But I don't see any reason to do that now. Oh well!

Arthur
aball
rushton's avatar
rushton
2,430 posts
 
Congratulations, Arthur: go for the music, always!

Also: thank you for your good hearted willingness to explore and then to simply say what you're hearing. I commend you for your contributions here.
.
t_bone
1,182 posts
 
Arthur, kudos to you for going through the process, and even more kudos for being diligent in recording your results and sharing them with all of us.
outlier's avatar
outlier
381 posts
 
I also commend Authur on valuable, honest throughs from what is surely a useful exercise, and one which might have saved me a lot of expense had I tried something similar, as I took the plunge into vinyl about 3 years ago (it's the reason I'm still driving a beat-up car).

One comment I'd like to throw into the mix is that the digital/analog comparison here was at the relatively low $$ end of the audiophile scale. From my limited experience, my sense is that as one spends more money on the front end, the law of deminishing returns hits harder on the digital side of things. Hence, a relative comparison of rigs costing $5k or $10k etc. might yield different results. Just a thought - I'd love to hear findings from such an exercise.
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Outlier...In my 10/24 posting I referenced my audition (at a dealer) of vinyl source costing about $60,000, where I concluded that it was only marginally better than my humble (and old) $1,500 rig. That old vinyl rig of mine is, with respect to my priorities, (surface noise important) very inferior to my digital source, also costing less than $2,000. In the dealer vinyl audition the speakers were identical to mine, and the amplification probably better.

I think that preference for vinyl or digital is not greatly affected by price level, but rather by the importance the listener places in the various aspects of sound reproduction.
drubin
3,240 posts
 
Well said. El.

I still contend that Aball's testing methodology is suspect in his results, but the rest of you seem to feel differently. If you were interested in humoring me (a big if, I know) you might try this: with levels matched as before, listen to records for an hour, then listen to CDs for an hour, then maybe back to records. Doesn't have to be the same recordings, necessarily. For the moment, set aside which one "sounds better" and focus on how much you are enjoying yourself and getting into the music. Because at the end of the day, isn't that the more meaningful criterion? (If I could only take my own advice...)
More to discover