1. Home
  2. analog
  3. 1269352705

Back to analog ..was it a mistake???

Like alot in the 1980s I went totally digital.Took my 300+ album collection and boxed them up never thinking I would venture back.My current digital system is about everything I always wanted.Black background,nice sound stage,fast,clean,detailed yet very musical.The speakers disappear and instument seperation is there and in the correct locations.Vocals are superb on all types of music IMO..
From strong suggestions from my bro I decided to try the analog approach again even though the analog systems Ive heard recently never came close to my setup.I bought a mid 1980s Linn lp12 and did some upgrades to it..Mose/Hercules2,new Akito2 arm,belt,oil,Denon DL160,cables..had it setup correctly.Bought a new Musical Surroundings Phono.Spent days cleaning records.What I have in sound is nothing short of a big dissapointment for the time and money spent.Forgetting the snap,crackle, pop which is very hard to get around the sound stage is nowhere to be found.The speakers no longer disappear,its like taking 10 steps backwards..Yea, I know the Linn isnt the beat all table as well as the phono but something is amiss here.Ive tried a few adjustments and things seem to become a little better but when I do the digital it becomes clear my analog attempt sucks.Am I expecting too much from my new investment back to analog???Is all this analog talk just talk from guys who never had a great digital system??Any positive imput or suggestions is appreciated..Thanks in advance
missioncoonery
mikeyc8
174 posts
 
I agree with undertow, vinyl is hit and miss even with a great set up, so you just have to be patient. Maybe the discs that you were listening to were dogs? I have no doubt that a properly setup analog system can beat a comparably priced digital one in terms of soundstage, imaging, bass etc. So if good sound is worth it to you, I would keep trying... maybe try another cart, look at your setup again, try some LPs that are proven to sound great. I did and I haven't turned on my CDP in years. However, if the inconvenience is not worth it to you, get a great DAC and rip a few thousand tunes onto your HD and don't look back. Oh, btw, you might want to fix the space key on your keyboard.
tvad
9,467 posts
 
There's no shame in pulling the plug on the analog experiment if you don't want to fuss with it further (although doing so will ultimately reap benefits).

Be happy with your digital front end and its ease of use.
lewm
6,770 posts
 
Dear Fsonicsmith,
I was interested to read your comment above. In my system and to my ears, one respect in which every and any vinyl set-up I've tried beats the crap out of CD is in soundstaging. Depth, width, and height of the image is ALWAYS superior with vinyl compared with CD, even when other aspects of the presentation are wanting and even when the LP itself is in bad shape. In fact, I judge my CDP based on improvements I can make in Its ability to image, using vinyl as a standard. I found that strategies that reduce jitter tend to help a lot in that regard.
mapman's avatar
mapman
15,679 posts
 
"Depth, width, and height of the image is ALWAYS superior with vinyl compared with CD"

Not the case at all with my system. I guess I must be doing something right.

just like some speakers are more efficient and easy to drive than others, not all are equally easy to get to do soundstage and imaging well.

But if you start with speakers that do those things well, and have them set up well to enable them to do it (including decent amplification), the source format pretty much is a non issue.

That is the case in my system with the OHMs and largely the case even my monitors, though perhaps to a somewhat lesser extent than with the omni and highly coherent OHMs. Almost everything I play has huge soundstage and accurate imaging, including FM and even home recorded cassettes. Even mono lps and CDs have a clean and natural sounding multidimensional aspec to them, though the soundstage is then restricted mostly to within the two speakers, though still with execellent depth, at least on decent recordings.

Each format has its limitations even when done to the max, but soundstage and imaging need not be one of them IMHO and experience.
newbee
4,093 posts
 
Mapman, Your comment, to me at least, reinforces the difference that we all may have in how we define 'image' or 'soundstage'.

We have discussed this before and I think we agree, that it is possible to have great soundstaging including the impression of depth which can be given by electrostats, omni's, panels, etc, yet be really unable to maximize the aspect of specificity.

For me one of the reasons I can find CD superior to vinyl is that vinyl has a groove noise that prevents you from having a totally black background. It is, IMHO, this black background that facilitates specificity, and can enhance all other aspects of soundstage as well. But, if specificity is not (as) important to you it is easy to overlook it absence.

Now if I had a vinyl system as well considered and used with the audio system that Fsonicsmith has put together I can appreciate his findings, but I do wonder if he has exerted the same effort in maximizing the potential of a total audio system based on advanced digital playback.

It would be fun someday to hear two separate systems in the same room, one max'ed out for digital and one for analog. Then the real argument of 'superiority' could begin. :-)
More to discover