Vinyl vs. top-notch digital


I have never had an analogy rig. My CD player is a Meridian 800, supposedly one of the very best digital players out there. From what I've read, it appears there is a consensus in our community that a high-quality analog rig playing a good pressing will beat a top notch digital system playing a well-recorded and mastered CD. So here are my questions:

1) How much would one have to invest in analog to easily top the sound quality of the Meridian 800 (or similar quality digital player)? (Include in this the cost of a phono-capable preamp; my "preamp" right now is a Meridian 861 digital surround processor.)

2) How variable is the quality of LPs? Are even "bad" LPs still better than CD counterparts?

Thank you for any comments and guidance you can provide.
jeff_arrington
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.
41 responses so far, but very little mention of the software.

My personal preference is firmly in the vinyl camp but I would not recommend anyone getting into vinyl today unless they truly felt committed to the sonic benefits of analog playback. It is not just the time and expense of selecting the hardware, it's building a vinyl library.

There are three basic choices for buying vinyl today. First there is a growing supply of favorite (and some not-so-favorite) albums being reissued. Most of these cost from $30-$60 when remastered by established engineers. Other label-generated reissues with unknown mastering may sell for $10-$20. Next is the vinyl resale market on line or from a few remaining stores. Here you can expect to pay from about $5 to three figures, depending on rarity and knowledge of the seller. Lastly, there is something known as "dumpster diving". This entails visits to local thrift stores to scrounge through their collections of used LPs. Prices can be cheap ($.25-$4) but it can be dirty and time consuming to sort through all the rejects to find anything of interest (artist, music, and condition). Who knew there were so many copies sold of Firestone Christmas music, Ray Conniff and Herb Alpert?

For anyone who has a collection of LPs they set aside when they sold their turntable years ago or have been given a collection by a family member or friend, that could be a different story. But starting from scratch with no current software could present a real challenge -- for both time and expense.

So Jeff my advice would be to find a friend with a decent analog playback system (not a dealer, you want a relaxed, unhurried experience) and spend some time listening. If you find that you appreciate what vinyl offers and you are willing to face the time and expense of building both the component parts and the LP library, then by all means go for it.