I am 68 years old. I have been a collector of bebop jazz for over 50 years starting in my mid-teens. I have listened to every format imaginable. Frankly, I love all of it, LPs, CDs, cassette tapes, and streaming. After it's all said and done I still find myself playing analog records most of the time. The artwork and the liner notes of LPs are magnificent. There is something that can be said about photography, artwork, and liner notes. You just can't get that in other formats.
This a really good point. I use streaming for this very reason. I have a Marantz network streamer for Tidal living next to a Rega turntable. They both have their place and individual use cases.
@@tebo2770 I agree completely. It's all entirely subjective, but for me there is some music that just feels like it should be heard on vinyl. I wouldn't want to give up streaming though, as I listen to a lot of music that way. There are albums from my youth that I think I may want on vinyl. Some times after listening to them via streaming I decide I don't really need them on vinyl. Things like playlists on streaming are something that can't be easily duplicated with vinyl.
Listening on your vinyl or CD wont let you fall in a fraud. The Qobuz free trial and gift voucher is a SCAM. Be careful before you insert your credit card details or paypal account on their system. Their website doesn't work so well and will subscribe you to something you don't want. And complaining to their customer service is useless, they wont refund you. Check on line, dig on tweetter, have a look of the complains on Trustpilot about this company. This is my experience. I've recently bought a Cyrus DAC so I could enjoy my HiRes music more. I chose one with a 3 month free subscription to Qobuz. It was a bit more expensive because of this but I wanted to try an online music streamer. I tried to enter the coupon code on Qobuz’s website but it didn’t work and I contacted the help centre. They told me to pay and subscribe to a monthly plan to activate the coupon and so I did but something went wrong. While following their instructions the website redirected me to the page with a yearly subscription selected, which I didn't notice until it was too late. At this point I received a notification from my bank saying I've been charged £149.99. I went to look on the Qobuz website and I saw my voucher was still there unused. I instantly used their website help centre to request a refund and cancellation of the subscription. Their emailed reply said “there is nothing we can do”, followed by the link of their terms and conditions. Every time I contact them, by email or using their website again, they take a day or two to reply and there is no telephone help line or live chat. I'm also trying to get their attention on Tweetter without any results. Doing some research on line (Eg. Trustpilot) it appears this is not the first time they have behaved this way. I feel frustrated for two reasons; having paid for a coupon that I can’t use, and having been charged £150 for a yearly subscription I was not looking for and I don't want. I haven’t streamed or downloaded anything from the service, at all. This seems a bad way for a company to behave.
I have just subscribed to Tidal and the first thing that struck me was how wildly inaccurate the description of the musicians is that accompanies the music. I’m currently playing _Calling Mission Mu_ by the Sydney classical group CODA. Tidal describes the music as “heavy metal” and the musicians are completely unknown to me, unlike the members of CODA. I can’t recall an LP cover that was so inaccurate in over 50 years of playing them!
Even as a vinyl guy this is pretty unfair. SME 15 turntable £9k, SME V arm £5k, Ortafon cadenza blue £1300, Van Den Hul Grail £5k, that's £20,000 of vinyl front end VS a £1750 DAC! You wouldn't compare £20k speakers to £1750 speakers. If you're going to have a fair competition then you should do a 20k vinyl rig vs a 20k DAC. Or a £1750 vinyl rig to a £1750 DAC. I love vinyl, I also have a cadenza blue, a Garrard 401, audiomods series 6 arm, & an icon audio PS3 tube phono. I have a basic dac for steaming & finding new music I like. If somebody is starting out, unless somebody has bequeathed them a lovely record collection, I'd always say go digital.
So true, I was about to write this myself. It’s often not talked about in this vinyl vs digital but it cost exponentially more to make vinyl sound good.
I'm with rocco036 here. While your DAC choice is a very well respected unit, I do wish you had used a dedicated streaming device to feed it. General purpose computers have always been suspect as to their ability to support really high end sound. With a computer you can never be absolutely sure the data going to the DAC has not been manipulated, and that's not to mention the potential for electrical "noise" bouncing around inside. Dedicated streamers go to great pains to eliminate these potential problems. All of the negative things you say about streaming COULD be due your "front end" choice.
CD players have decades of development behind them, so if you're going to compare digital with vinyl, I think a really good CD player would have been a better place to start. To my ears, with the upgrades I've done to my CD player, I'm enjoying the music just as much as I did on my Linn turntable before I had to let it go. Streaming it touted as being better than CD due to high res and being more convenient, however, when I used to watch Darko, before he lost the plot, it seemed to me ludicrously complex. Whilst we're at it, I would not let any computer come near my music play back system, as the shear racket in the circuitry would be a nightmare to deal with down the line. Not to mention the horror of selecting what to listen to. There is a reason restaurants have menus, it's so that people get fed. I'll add a cheap Bluetooth DAC to my system in the study before the Summer comes so when my family comes around they can hook up their phones and choose the music for the barbecue. Now that's a use for steaming I can get behind. Of course, if I don't like it I'll switch it off and put the Buena Vista Social Club on the CD! 😄
not just the dac too, but a reclocker and a buffered input and all that shit too if were getting into cray cray audiophile bullshittery. even just something like a pi2aes
I've got Brothers In Arms by Dire Straits on both Vinyl and CD, and they sound practically identical (from what I've read the album was recorded on digital tape machines in the mid 80's so it would make sense for them to be identical) apart from the vinyl lacking some of the really low and high frequencies as well as slightly worse stereo separation. But in the year 2020 the whole vinyl vs digital argument in my opinion is mostly just based on which format has better mastering at this point. Vinyl will of course use the highest resolution files (96khz or 192khz and higher) compared to most digital versions that are either 44.1khz or 48khz (and on most streaming services lossy on top of that..) so it does have an advantage in that regard. But overall it's more about the mastering (as long as you are listening to lossless digital files). And from my experience most vinyl records have a much more dynamic, better sounding master than any of the digital versions. Digitally distributed music is STILL obsessed with making everything as loud as possible while vinyl is typically mastered to sound as best as possible.
I haven't yet watched this clip, but isn't it true that due to its inherent limitations vinyl cannot be compressed as much as digital ( ironically). If I were into the music of the last 20 years for better sound I'd go for vinyl, but the convenience ( which we know has always been the biggest factor in recorded music , not quality) music & choice on streaming would be hard to beat .
When the back catalog of analog was originally transferred to digital, do we believe the attention given to each release was the same as when it was originally released? Do we think the master tapes and playback systems were in as good a shape as when they were new, in all cases? I knew someone that transferred old movies to dvds, at Universal, they were basically in an assembly line situation, working 80 hours a week, during that initial ramp up period. I bet a lot of good music was converted under similar circumstances. Im not a streamer yet. I’m a vinyl guy with a lot of CDs, SACDs, DVD-A and Blu-Rays. I love it all, and I’ve been floored listening to all mediums from time to time, when the right music catches me at the right time. I’m really grateful that we have all of it.
I don't think so. I worked in a record store when CDs were new and when vinyl was officially removed from stores. Quality was all over the place. I have discs from the 80s that still sound noticeably different from each other.
@@MichelleTackabery I remember listening to my first cds back in the day. They were clean but IMHO they sounded flatter than their vinyl counterparts. I have better gear now but I don't listen to my main stereo much I mostly do it thru a set of Klipsch promedia 2.1 - nearfield. Not great I know but I added a dragonfly cobalt to help with the sound.
@@marshallhughes4514 I hear you. It really depended upon the artist and the label. Sting's first solo record (Turtles) on CD was amazing compared to one I bought around the same time, maybe The Cure? Of course I first listened to the Sting on an audiophile friend's system, too
Everyone seems to overlook that vinyl is cut from a master tape or file that must be altered to suit the cutter and groove geometry. Those alterations are by the vinyl masterer. Bass should be moved and carefully kept in check to avoid groove issues. High frequencies may be shaped so the cutter doesn't overheat with signals it can't follow. And a cutter head is, basically, not unlike two speaker motors coupled to a ruby chisel-shaped stylus. You remember how different speakers sound different? So do cutters; they aren't magic. And for fervent feedback haters, fair warning -- cutters use feedback to keep distortion in check. Yet, with great care, patience, and experience, vinyl can be very good. Or, cranked out for the great unwashed, it can be pretty darn crappy -- overdriven, deliberately compressed and limited to keep the playback stylus of a Crosley in the grooves. (On some pop music, this seems desirable.) And to overlay this, the pressing factory may tolerate variances in temperature and the generation of stampers to suit economics. This may be why "remastered" vinyl may be just awful. Or not. There's no accepted way of saying "this is a good one" on the album cover. What audiophiles do cover, ad nauseum, is playback strategy. All of that is also in the cutting, which you never see. It may not be enough to just say, "I love vinyl." There's a lot of artistry in mastering vinyl, and it shows. You might have to say, instead, "I love some vinyl." -Just One Man's View.
What about the Columbia House crappy pressings that you would get 21 LPs for a penny if you bought 6 more at regular overprice? The vinyl was thin and so was the sound. I never had a way to prove it back then, but Columbia House must have had their own pressing machines. The label said "reproduced under license". Jim brings up a great point about the production issues of vinyl.
@@peteway9377 Yes. Audiophiles often spend $thousands trying to make a vinyl 'silk purse' from a vinyl 'sow's ear.' I know, I have. Somebody should make a small, attractive "resolution reducer" with a big round, machined-from-billet-aluminum knob. In its highest setting, it could make your $50K system sound like an Emerson portable phono/record changer circa 1960. Call it an "Audio Enhancer." Put a price of $6999 on it. Offer a model with lighted VU meters to match a McIntosh for $12999.
I switched to CD in 1984 for audio quality - every vinyl copy of Talk Talk's 'The Colour Of Spring' had a pressing fault that hissed loudly. People tend to forget nowadays how cheaply made vinyl was in the early 80s, at least in the UK.
I have bought around 200 LPs this year in a variety of styles, and yes, the 80s pressings - especially current pop records - are always the worst sounding. With only the compact cassette to compete with (which was worse!), little thought seems to have been given to quality. The inner groove is simply horrible on those records. These days I seek out the same albums on CD.
It's not only that we're badly pressed ( perhaps a nudge to people to favor CDs?) but at a certain point you couldn't get new releases on vinyl ( or were expensive/ more difficult).
@@phrtao The profit margin on CDs killed vinyl sales off. It still amazes me that stores charged the same or in some cases more for a CD than a vinyl record!
It was the extremely poor quality of vinyl pressings that induced a great sigh of relief in me when CDs became widely available. I have several LPs that are _completely unlistenable_ and even more where several tracks are. None of that applies to any of the CDs I own. At worst I have three or four CD tracks that refused to rip and needed transferring to my PC via analog. Almost all of my several hundred LPs have been digitised and all of my CDs ripped to FLAC. When I’m listening to music I couldn’t give a damn whether the source is LP, CD or a data stream.
As a 57 year old guy that is just getting back into vinyl, this was the most interesting video I have seen in a long time. When CD's first came out, like many folks, the convenience was incredible. I'm rediscovering how wonderful vinyl can be though. For me, based on perceptions left over from my youth, being born into an analog world, there is some music and groups that need to be heard on vinyl.
...just discovering old CD's that suffered from "digititus" (shrill/digital sounding) ...now played through my a newly-purchased Metrum Pavane Dac and BAT tubes ... digital is now very close to my Rega P9 ...with the quality of the recording often the determining factor.
I love streaming music. But sometimes I still buy the physical record/cd. One example is the band XTC. Only about half their albums can be found on streaming services like spotify and Tidal.
I bought virtually nothing but cassettes and CDs for much of the 90s. I basically lived in Europe out of the backpack and a car for more than a decade until 2004. Records collections are not portable without international movers, so I left them all at home in the UK and hardly gave them a thought. I finally imported my records to Paris and since then I have gone back over to buying vinyl almost exclusively. It’s fun. I have been listening to records for 40 years and no regrets!
Right there with you Jeff. I'm 50 myself and have streamed for a long time. Recently bought a Rega table and quickly found that I really enjoy vocal oriented music far better on vinyl. I believe the warmer sound signature of analog works well with vocal and mids in general. But, there is a place and time for both for sure.
“Better” is a funny word. People tend to like the idea that we are objectively assessing things when we determine our likes and dislikes. You ask people what “better” means in this context and most would say it’s more true to the source… accurate. Given the choice, they pick the sound that best meets their expectations regardless of which is actually more accurate. Steve’s expectations for what Paul McCartney’s voice sounded like singing “Maybe I’m Amazed” were set by that record, and slightly amended every time the needle slid through the grooves, slightly rounding off the corners and peaks. In an apples to apples comparison using the exact same master tape, digitized to a WAV file on a cd or a flac file in a drive, and then run through an r-2r DAC; compare the waveform out of the DAC to what’s on the master tape and there will be far less distortion than what comes out of even the best phono preamp with the best cart and the best turntable playing a record made from the same master… every time. There is no such thing as mechanical perfection and there is too much room for error in analog recording, storage and reproduction for vinyl to come anywhere close to digital in terms of actual accuracy. I love vinyl, because vinyl is my favorite flavor of distortion. I like the warm hiss and the smooth sound. I appreciate the imperfections that remind me of the truly imperfect nature of life. It’s the same reason why I can’t listen to autotuned tracks that refuse to show that they are made by imperfect humans who don’t always hit the exact note. At the end of the day, music appreciation is subjective and it’s silly to pretend there are objective standards for what we like about it.
The most balanced comparison I have seen. Some prefer the signal processing of vinyl, what you called "additive distortion." That is wonderful - enjoy! I happen to prefer the digital file, to which I can add distortions digitally when I wish. Digital can sound analog if you prefer it.
"Vinyl is Vinyl and Digital is Digital". This sentence, by itself, is the best you mentioned to give a proper answer to the title of this great video. I have subscriptions to both Qobuz and Tidal. I love to play with Dac and Mqa and streamers but... I arrive to a point that I NEED to listen to Vinyl with one of my two turntables. It's REALLY a different way to listen to music. Not better or worse. Just different. That's why I usually play music through streamers, Sacd player and turntables.
@@MichelleTackabery actually many of us have a subscription to Qobuz and Tidal. The database is not overlapping. The user interface is different and sometimes searches differ. It's also important to check which of the two platforms, for the album you are interested in, offers Hi Rez or standard CD quality. It's also nice to make comparisons between lossless Flac and Mqa (with the right Dac).
Steve, you keep blowing my mind. After all these years, you are still growing, still learning, still teaching, and still HAVING A GREAT TIME! You keep me coming back. I love it, all of it. (Including the lovely shirts and artwork from Mrs. A!) Many thanks. Keep 'em coming, sir!
I don't recall the convenience CDs being cited as the primary advantage. I recall reading about the clarity of the sound and wider dynamic range. And that confirmed my own impressions when I first heard CDs: the sound was just better, crystal clear and without the irritating surface noise that came from playing records. I have a turntable, which I bought five years ago or so, and a few records, which I play from time to time. For me it's all about nostalgia. I love looking at the turntable and watching it work. But I don't hear superior sound, despite the many people who claim that is the case.
Yep, the original sound of my first CDs in the Spring of '85 were jaw dropping. Those CDs were an interesting mix, The Doors - The Doors, Pink Floyd - DSOTM and Prince - Purple Rain but each showcased the new technology in a different way. The original CD mastering was still wide open then, so the dynamics and S/N were incredible! When I heard The Doors "The End" on CD for the first time, it was such an awesome experience. I never gave up my records and I do have a issues with some digital recordings, especially the glassy top end or heavily compressed stuff but I appreciate well recorded music in any format. Most of the time, I don't think one is better than the other, but they definitely sound different and stir up different feelings. Just my opinion.
I love the ceremony of playing vinyl. Hunting for the record, then pulling it out of the sleeve and holding it in my hands. Preparing the turntable and cleaning the record, dimming the lights and then placing the needle on the record. It feels like I'm honoring the recording by being actively involved in caring for it and giving it a place of importance in my priorities. And then sometimes I just love the ease and simplicity of streaming. 🤷🏻
Reminds me of the men who shave with a safety razor and go with the ritual of soap lather, shave, repeat, repeat, styptic pencil, than a quick swipe with a 5 blade Gillette. Honor the blade.
Documentary photographer Sebastio Salgado runs his perfect digital images through a computer program that makes them look like grainy tri-x film. There's just something more satisfying about analogue.
I’m more digital now, I’m on the hunt of new music lately and getting everything on vinyl is becoming to expensive and after a while your interest in an album or band fades and you’re stuck with unplayed vinyl.
Funny coincidence. I am in the middle of Greg Milner’s excellent tome “Perfecting Sound Forever” I just finished a chapter on this very topic. Steve touches on it here as well. In the book there’s a quote from an engineer that if one took a blank lacquer, have no signal coming down, cut a series of silent grooves, put it on a turntable and dropped the needle, you would “get” a nice soft round pink noise. Everything heard on a record is heard through that filter of pink noise. The conclusion being “maybe what analog fans really want is “a record that sounds like a record.” Steve nicely concludes this subject that maybe there are no real winners, or an either or situation but rather what and how you like to listen to music.
Sisyphos would love this comment section! It’s a question of personal taste and the used gear in my opinion. Being an audiophile is such a highly subjective passion, the only thing no one can deny, vinyl has a certain magic to it because of the ritual that comes with the handling of the equipment and LP’s.
My turntable seldom sees the light of day. I don't know how vinyl afficianotoes manage to ignore the pops and clicks that make me crazy. I was overjoyed when CDs arrived. I sought out DDD recordings.
this is where I call it quits; I understand speakers, subs, setup, imaging, sound stage, decent quality recordings - all those make a real difference - but this whole analog vs digital conversation is why non-audio enthusiasts say audiophiles are nuts; splitting hairs is nothing
Even though vinyl can in most cases (like CD) sound much better than streaming, having a mac mini doing the streaming process is not a fair way to go (to compare both formats), because it adds a lot of jitter into the process. The analogue side of the equation is in a clear advantage. You should have picket a dedicated streamer + DAC to have a fair comparison, Steve. :)
I still do lp and cd. Most of my lp sound better but my cd player is very good. I even do a cassette from time to time. I stream when I want to listen to something I dont have a physical copy of. I like physical media and I dont know what it would cost to get a good streamer. For me it just doesn't matter. My system sounds very good to me and I think that is most important.
I'm 100% digital, I have 4500 sacds, 3100 dvda, 8000+ cds, and 900 magnet tapes in 1/8th and 1/2inch. They all are better than anything on vinyl record.
Sonus Faber Aida mains Bryson 4b Amp. I have a Sonus Faber 7 floor... With the Aida as LR. And the menuettos as the surrounding, and 2 menuettos as the center (both amped independent). Four Macintosh for atmos overheads, Infiniti for the side speakers. Emotiva dual reference for most speakers. Bryson for the mains, and 3 center channel.
Why I use the emotiva RMC 1. Because it has per imput trims in good old UK board settings for bass, mid, and treble. And you can save them to the processor. It's better than my lexicon processor in every way.
Steve, I think your idea of additive distortion via LP playback is brilliant!! As a musician it makes so much sense!! A guitar in the northern hemisphere is tuned to 440 because of physics. All acoustic instruments are tuned based on the natural environment. A turntable by default must obey natural laws of many types and thus it's sound is familiar to our collective unconscious. Digital music is not as susceptible to these first principles so it only makes sense that the sound would reflect such. It's kinda like the difference between an acoustic grand piano and a grand piano patch on an electronic keyboard......both sound very close to each other however the acoustic version will always have natural imperfections that add to it's musicality that digital will never be able to reproduce.
some of my favorite recordings to listen to are vinyl rips from people with very nice systems. in a way, you kind of get the best of both worlds. the convenience of digital, and a taste of that person's phono cartridge, preamp, etc.
Hi Steve, I’ve not commented before, but really appreciate your videos. I found myself asking myself about this a few months ago, and tried recording various sources to hi-res flac. What I found interesting was to compare spectographs. I have a number of sources on LP from the late 1950’s through to now, including digitally mastered vinyl from the 1980’s, some Cr02 cassettes, that I have duplicates of on CD. I have a few DVD & blu ray audio disks. What I found was that on early vinyl, the frequency response drops off around 18 kHz, in much the same way later Cr02 cassettes do. The quality is not much poorer than CD, IMO,. From the mid-60’s the high frequency response increases, and drops off about 24kHz - even recording at 96kHz, there seems to be little benefit, as the signal drops off around 24kHz. However, I am sure that 24-bit gives a better sound than the 16-bit of CD. When I play more recent remastered sources on vinyl, the high frequency response appears to drop off about 22 kHz, which is about the same as the CD version. The point I am coming to myself is that recordings are best listened to on the medium they were intended for. Digital recording/masters sound best on a digital format, Analog recording/masters sound best on vinyl. Because most remasters are done digitally, for digital media, you get the worst of both worlds - something intended for vinyl on digital format, or something analog digitally reprocessed on vinyl. Objectively, it hard to justify, but subjectively, in my limited experience, that is how it appears to me. What has surprised me is that I can get a decent digital recording from some of my Cr02 cassettes - nearly as good as CD - the key is to have a decent Analog-to-Digital-converter in the loop. The advantage of recording vinyl to 48kHz 24-bit flac is it can then be stored on my NAS & a portable SSD to use when I’m away - and I can process the audio files to clean up any noise & crackles between tracks. What I find weird is that my own digital recordings sound nearly as good as the vinyl originals to me, and better than the CD versions.
There are significant differences in mastering practices over the years between CDs and phonograph records. There are consistent differences between cumulative SPL spectra and in the amount/degree of compression and clipping between the two formats that can be easily seen using Audacity, etc. Both Vinyl and digital lossless are typically mastered with a fair amount of treble boost between 1-5 kHz. Vinyl also sports significant levels of extreme low frequency attenuation to keep your expensive cartridge/needle in the groove instead of launching itself out of the groove (which is basically most of the "passing" QC criterion for phono mastering). The CD versions of old albums from vinyl-only days (i.e., originally recorded/released before 1982) also usually retain this deep bass attenuation so no one will complain about "too much bass" when listening to the CDs after listening to the vinyl versions from decades ago. For reasons probably associated with the lack of midbass trapping in most listening rooms, CDs have historically been mastered with a fair amount of added mid-bass attenuation in the 100-200 Hz band, making the sound very thin--sort of like a table radio. Much more clipping is used on CDs mastered since 1991 (from 3 to 11 db), resulting in splashy sibilences and exaggerated high frequency percussion sounds. Virtually all "remastered" CD versions sport significantly increased compression than the original vinyl versions. If you reverse engineer these mastering EQ curves in either vinyl records or CDs, you'll start to hear the same thing out of both of them (except the increased vinyl noise levels). This has essentially nothing to do with the exact type of DACs, turntables/cartridges/phono preamps, etc. Vinyl will generally present higher track noise in the form of pops/ticks, rumble, wow/flutter, etc. than digital formats. Analog tape masters always give themselves away via significantly increased background noise levels vs. digital recordings.
I think the real or more appropriate question should be...What recordings are mixed, recorded and produced the best...analogue or digital. As I think both mediums would or could be equal...but only if the same skill and care and attention was done at the production stage!
@@manFromPeterborough Yeah, right. The same POS that DJ's use. For them it's not a POS because it does what they need it to do - not because of sound quality. Those things have so much low frequency rumble it's not even funny.
Defo would have been a more equal comparison using a good streamer and the Denefrips Terminator. I have heard that the Mytek is often too analytical for some. So you would expect to hear more of a difference.
This will be a different conversation in 10 years. A mastering engineer at a MAJOR studio told me lots of the bad digital mastering from the 90s and 00s is being redone. Even the new Marley half/speed pressings have a digital step. I think the future of digital is bright, but it’s not there yet.
I gravitate towards CD/Streaming for the convenience, lifestyle fit, and just ease of being able to listen to music whenever. I understand the beauty of vinyl. I do believe that music that was recorded at the time of vinyl was mastered to that medium properly and may not sound better there than in any other format. As we all know, audio is very subjective and dependent on so many factors - room, master, mix, equipment used for playback, recording gear, and our own personal bias (that can change from one tweet to the other!). I'm a music fan more than an audiophile and this is why I welcome digital/streaming. I had vinyl, then CDs, and now I stream. Whatever makes me enjoy my music from a good - but inexpensive - wireless speaker, to a high-end stereo system. I enjoy how music changes from one format to the other, from one set of speakers to the other. It's all part of the joy of music. More so, these days good gear and streaming are rather affordable so, as the Beatles said on Sgt. Peppers, "A splendid time is guaranteed for all."
I too find that in general original digital recordings sound best played back in the digital domain, and analog in the analog domain. However, there can always be a mastering engineer or cutter who screws it up, or makes it better. That is why being able to see such credits is so important! There are engineers I can count on, and ones I know to stay away from.
Great video Steve, I think you may have hit the nail on the head without actually realising it. Something that I’ve noticed over the last couple of years is that electronic music regardless of how it was recorded tends to sound better in digital formats. This can be EDM, hip hop, industrial, experimental classical, electro pop (the whole gamut) not necessarily better than analogue, but certainly better than rock, folk, jazz or classical does in digital formats. Streaming is great, it’s the best to hear new (new to you) music, without having to invest in something you might not like. I use streaming for discovery and vinyl to collect and enjoy. Different tools for different jobs.
When I updated my audio gear I had 4 sources I wanted to maximize. The first was to listen to albums and immerse myself in its sound, the visual enjoyment of the album cover and the art design/photography. The 2nd was my cassette tape library which included mix tapes I made and ones gifted to me. The 3rd was my CD collection and the ease of selecting tracks I was in the mood to listen. The final was streaming my ripped music of Playlist. Tidal and Qobuz gave me the ability to discover new music. Something I used to use iTunes in the past. Some artists do not have vinyl versions so streaming it was my only choice. Each music source/format provides an experience depending on what I want. So many times technology is lost because of format wars. I am glad albums are back and that people are servicing vintage cassette decks. For me they each have a place in my system equally. Great video as always 👍.
based on the huge price discrepancy of the equipment being used, ie: the mega cost of the turntable vs. the rather modest cost of the digital streamer used, I don't find this comparison to be on equal footing.
I remember when I traded my old Micro Seiki 77 turntable, for a Philips 104 CD. I could hear immediately the records was better. It was more organic and coherent. The time and improvement of digital streaming has really made it sound pretty good when you listen today though. These days days, my "breakthrough" came when I heard Spotify over my Yamaha HS 7 with the HS 8 sub. When I got my KEF LS 50W with a B&W sub, I could suddenly hear the difference between Spotify and Tidal. Tidal was more dynamic, clear and with great resolution. But records still have a place in my heart. Sometimes I miss my old Micro Seiki 77. 💚 Thanks for a great reminder Steve. 😘
The worst thing I ever did to my wallet was to get a quality turntable. I was perfectly fine with my streaming and cd collection for years, and then I ruined it by getting into vinyl. When you don't have anything to compare digital to, everything sounds great. Once you hear vinyl you realize something has been missing from your life. Not always better, but definitely a different way to listen, and I find it much easier on my ears. I can listen to vinyl all day without ear fatigue... digital not so much.
Could vinyl be 'easier on the ears' because the dynamic range of LP' s is limited to 60-70dB at best and digital can produce a dynamic range of around 100dB?
@@Wuppie62 I'm not sure. I know previously CD's actually didn't use as much range as they had available due to them mixing them "loud". So the functional dynamic range was actually greater on Vinyl even though it is technically more limited.
@@JC-lk3oy Listening to constant loud music - in which everything sounds equally loud - is tiring in the long run. So I guess you're right about your cd's and the loudness war (clipping). I also read that with the rise of streaming music services and the decline of cd sales, the loudness war could be replaced by the use of normalisation, which would lower the pressure from the market to mix recordings as loud as possible. Hmm..
For my part, I have started listening on Tidal allot. I enjoy the selection, the immediate availability and the pricing. I've even taken to reading my stereo and music mags and popping over to Tidal to stream whatever the reviewer is writing about so i can hear it for myself and compare my reactions. Damn, if I could only do that with audio components!!! If I find something I really like, I'll see if it's available (and reasonably priced) on LP. If so, it'll be here in 3 days. I'm new to jazz and Tidal has allowed me to explore and refine my taste at almost no expense. Download and vinyl complement each other perfectly. Further, I can agree with Steve that some titles sound better to me on download but, mostly, LP's are my preference - though at $35 per copy, it's not always an impulse decision.
That basically what I do. Vinyl has become just the experience of listening to what it sounds like on vinyl and when I have time to sit down and enjoy. This is after I’ve listened on either tidal or cd. Hard to beat convenience of Tidal.
The best reproduced music I've ever heard, the most palpably, compellingly real, either in my own systems or the best systems I've listened to that aren't mine, has been on vinyl. Especially, the direct to disk (Sheffield Labs) and best quality pressings/remasters (like Mobility Fidelity, Nautilus, etc.). Digital has gotten SO good even with the last few years, and even more convenient. I feel that turntables are lovely, elegant precision devices, but they are fiddly, fragile things. They have to be set up and dialed in very carefully, and evening using the turntable and vinyl recordings has to be done with care.
My purely subjective opinion is that on my very modest set up, a well mastered and pressed LP sounds better than the equivalent on CD (I don't use hi-res streaming or any streaming for that matter). The sound is just more spacious and dynamic. Of course there are many drawbacks to vinyl, mainly it is very expensive and idiosyncratic in terms of the constraints of the media (inner groove wear for example), I don't blame people for being pro digital or just ambivalent towards the whole analogue vs digital argument. And then there's the collecting angle or the ritual aspect of vinyl - much harder to quantify those aspects but it all ties in with vinyl preference.
I recently started appreciating both vinyl and cd more... CD's by upgrading my cd player to a Marantz cd6000 ki , and vinyl by wet cleaning vinyl.. all media can be incredible if you ask me, enjoy the music 🥰
The reason for me to sell my record hard ware and my Vinyl are several: I am 71 and a great music enthusiast, but I am also a minimalist. I also got used to streaming during the last 7 years to discover new music. I love nature and hiking and biking. But streaming makes it possible for me being outside and still enjoy music. At home I got a Sonos Era 300. By Apple Music and Tidal I enjoy music both at home and outside and even at the gym. I still have 1000 CDs but no hard ware and still struggle if I should sell them, too. (But for that I would need new hardware and I don’t have the money to get that in high quality. A cheap recorder with low sound quality is not an option for me, because everything I have with streaming in better sound quality. Greetings from Germany
Thank you for a thoughtful and thought provoking presentation. This is certainly a good beginning. Your discussion of additive versus subtractive distortion hits the nail on the head. I would love to see a blind or even double blind comparison test to avoid cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias. As others have previously commented, the analog rig costs ten times the price of the digital-- wondering why you did not use your Denafrips DAC? I agree with the people who suggest that you should have used a dedicated streamer in your comparison. A possible cheaper alternative would be a desktop with an I2S output (Matrix) fed into your DAC. After assembling a decent rock and jazz collection I switched over to CDs, and now have thousands that sound no better than a stream. A small percentage are unavailable on the sites, but most have been rendered essentially worthless. My smaller LP collection looks like the better investment. Now as a result of RU-vid, I follow Ken Micallef and Michael Fremer down the vinyl rabbit hole, coming full circle. It is inconceivable that better digital technologies will not surpass the inherent physical limitations of vinyl. Whither SACD? But as I hold a Tone Poet in my hand, I am more deeply connected to the music. There's the rub.
This proves that most of us aren't looking for a perfect copy of the live performances but rather we have an innate preference for a "sound" . I don't think anyone can be right about this, just accept you like what you like and I like what I like and sometimes I like what you like and you like what I like.
OMG, Julee Cruise - Floating into the Night... Absolutely Amazing!!!!!!!!!! THANK YOU for the heads-up on this album. I loved the TV series, but the music more!
What we need is extremely high end system to do the master tapes to digital conversion. And then there are the original master tapes to digital as tidal claims. In what equipments are those done with, are they everytime the same?. Not all tape players sound same etc. So this comparison is basically 100% impossible task to even do accurately. The right way to do it is to do from digitally recorded files to analog. Now we can be sure the master outputs are 100% the same every time and listen what sounds better, is it CD/highres file or LP on 200.000$ turntable..
Of the many channels I have subscriptions for, yours is by far the one I look forward to the most. No politics or bad vibes, just fun, information and great music. Nice job on handling such a controversial topic...
I love Steve Guttenberg. Period. I watch all of his videos and read almost all review articles written by him in the past. Having said that - let me amplify Nick S' comment below. Are we not comparing apples to oranges? What is the total $$$ investment in the turntable + tonearm + cartridge + phono preamp + any accessory like cleaning machine, isolation platform etc. and what is the $ investment in the streaming setup? Get equivalent priced DAC + streamer/server and listen again. This is not a criticism by any means, as Steve has all the knowledge and experience that I do not have and will never reach in this lifetime. I love listening to records too! I am heavily invested in vinyl set up. However as a person who is format agnostic, I can say that when someone listens to a $15k+ DAC and $5k+ streamer and another $2-3k server combo, the listener may feel something really close to listening to the equivalent priced analog set up. How does someone expect a $2-3k DAC to outperform a $20K+ analog set up? Again, I love Steve and respect his contributions.
Hi Steve, I followed through on the sampler downloads you posted. Great to have these, as it gave me a chance to run the files through a spectrum analyser. What I found is that while most are 88.2 - 192 kHz samples, most frequency responses drop off completely after 24 kHz. So, there is no observable benefit to saving these above 48 kHz. In fact, some drop off at 22.5 kHz, which means that while the 24 bit-depth may be higher quality than 16-bit CD, there is no advantage in saving the files above 44.1 kHz. All that is happening is using up a huge amount of disk space & band width with nothing. What was even stranger is that some files drop off at about 18 kHz - which is about the same as for a Cr02 cassette! This is about the same as the upper limit of human hearing for most people (especially boomers like us). I am sure there is benefit in 24-bit over 16-bit, and this is what people notice in hi-res audio - but these files confirm my suspicion that there is little benefit in anything over 48kHz, which will allow for a frequency range up to 24 kHz. I can provide a more detailed breakdown if you would like, but would need time to analyse & present the data more systematically. Thanks for facilitating access to these files, which have confirmed my previous finding using the vinyl/96kHz version of Peter Gabriel Live. What I have found with other hi-res media is that often the recording is limited by the original recording media. My Led Zeppelin live blu ray audio, while 96kHz, is very poor; as far as I can tell, this is because of the limited quality of live recording equipment 50 years ago. What you often end up with is a high resolution remastered reproduction of a low quality source - with the flaws of the original reproduced almost perfectly. Analog, by its nature, adds distortion to any signal - the art of producing analog sound is in reproducing analog distorted in a way that sounds pleasing to the human ear. Tubes, for example, do not provide a “purer” sound, but a sound that is coloured in a way that appeals to the listener. The ideal setup for digital would be a digital to analog processor that provides enough distortion to trick the ear into thinking the source is analog. Theoretically, the more accurate the reproduction, less distorted, & closer to the digital source is, the less appealing it will sound. Because our brains are fuzzy analog devices, not digital. In my opinion.
I do both. Indeed I play CD, I stream and play downloaded FLAC files or ripped CDs. I like the variety and I like playing with the differences in sound depending on the source. Lots of fun!
Couldn't agree more. I use Tidal to discover music, mostly playing in the background as I do other things. What I really enjoy I invest and buy on vinyl (best pressing I can afford), and that is then what I use for more active listening. I don't necessarily enjoy vinyl more for how it sounds, but I just enjoy listening that way more. But if I had to live forever after with only Tidal as a source, I'd be totally fine with that. It's a really great idea and service, which I enjoy tremendously. No winners or losers, only what we enjoy the most is best.
Great summary. I’m a Tidal subscriber but my new turntable arrived today (a Pro-Ject Carbon Evo). I bought it only because I miss ‘owning’ my favorite music. No plans to buy everything I listen to in vinyl but rather to purchase only the albums that I truly love.
I use both. When I'm taking road trips you have to stream or use CDs and I use high resolution audio because it's the best. At home I may use vinyl, streaming, my high res files, or CDs. It depends on what I want to listen to.
Whilst it’s true that for most of us, this kind of gear is out of reach financially, there is another crucial factor to the enjoyment of the vinyl experience - the point of origin of the records themselves. There is a huge difference between records records pressed in say, Germany, UK, France and the US. Classic, big selling records from the 50s/60s were locally produced and cut in a variety of ways and on differing materials. Some have deep grooves, some shallow, some have a wide inner groove while others are pushed right up to the label with little thought to the consequences. As to ‘vinyl’, that seems to be a relative term. Not only does it come in different weights, it also appears to be differently formulated. eg: a typical 50s Mercury LP from the US feels and sounds more akin to a 78 ( even in your hands ) while a UK pressing looks and sounds as modern as can be. And all this is before we even consider mono versus Stereo. I find that the choice is less between streaming and vinyl and more about choosing the record you prefer from among multiple copies.
Your statement seems so true. While streaming Van Halen's default playlist on Tidal, the bass on some 70's songs sound really full and hard hitting and on others like it is turned off and overall thin and unexciting. I'm thinking about adding in a box with knobs that I can quickly add in some "enhancement" from tune to tune or give up on suggested playlists where the quality is inconsistent (probably a better choice). Where is that loudness button on my pre-amp?
Upgrade to the Ortofon mc Anna, that would we a killer front end.You're so right, digital is just easier ! For digital it's early days, compared to analog. Would be interesting if you could compare it to a far more expensive DAC ,see if it would make a lot of difference. The law of diminishing returns.
Interesting video Steve. I’ve been doing similar test lately with various DAC’s and high end streamers. As you say the numbers make streaming more accurate but I just can’t listen to it for more than an hour without feeling fatigued. I can listen to vinyl for hours and it’s pure pleasure. I’m a photographer and I feel the same about digital photos, it’s convenient, clinical and it’s what the masses want. When I take photos for pleasure I shoot film as to me it has depth and soul. It’s exactly the same with music, there is just a warmth and depth to vinyl that I can’t feel with any digital format. I get goosebumps when playing a lot of my records as they just sound so good, I’m yet to feel this way with digital.
I got back into vinyl about 5 years ago in my 60’s-started with an entry level Music Hall table and moved up to a VPI Scout after a year so of enjoying the vinyl experience. Prior to that I started listening to CD’s ripped to computer and through a DAC and also have used Qobuz, Tidal, and Amazon HD. I really don’t critically listen to the streaming in most cases because often I’m listening while cooking or other activities around he house. I also use streaming for music discovery and in making decisions on what titles to buy in vinyl. My original CD’s sound better than the CD rips and streaming in most cases but convenience wins out in the digital experience for me. I honestly prefer vinyl through my Scout even though bass is sometimes not as prominent and tight. There’s something about vinyl that sounds more realistic to me in most cases and particularly listening to jazz recorded live in a club. But I’m glad to have all these formats and enjoy them all.
I have to say, I love the concept of this video, but there is a BIG caveat! Some people called this out already, but I think it's worth pointing out that this comparison is truly flawed. I know it's just for fun, but since Steve is an influencer in this field, I feel that it's just giving some arguments to digital naysayers without being fair, putting fuel on the fire of the analog vs digital debate... The vinyl setup costs 10x the cost of the digital setup! If we can agree that this $30k vinyl setup sounds better than a $3k vinyl setup (like a Clearaudio Concept with Pro-Ject Tube Box DS), then it means that the results of this comparison would be quite different, logically speaking, if a $3k setup was used. The vinyl sound might still be preferred on the albums where it was preferred here, but there might be bigger caveats or trade-offs showing up. The opposite is also true (unless you are in the bits-are-bits camp) that with something like an EMM Labs DA2 with a dedicated streamer, the gap could narrow or even switch in some instances. I know it was for fun, but I really think it would be fair to redo it with similarly priced components!
Is the cost really a factor after some level? Does it take a $30k vinyl setup to even compare to a $3k digital setup? I'm ducking my head... Just throw an equalizer in the mix to shape the sound. Now I'm hiding under the bed ...
Being born in the younger generation definitely has it's pros: no need to choose between digital and analog if all your music has never been released in analog.
That's a shame. I won't say analog is better, but it definitely offers something different than digital. I would hate to not have it as an option at least. What Steve quoted about "The best way to listen to digital, is to never listen to analog" is also very true though. Also digital is much cheaper, so your wallet is definitely better off at least.
@@MrB10N1CLE Absolutely, but there is a lot of gold from the past worth exploring. It can be interesting to look into the influences of artists you like. Music is always evolving, but seeing how things progressed and how it got where it is now, can be extremely rewarding.
There are vinyl ripped files nowadays. How good do they sound compared to pure vinyl, cd, cd ripped or streaming sound. It seems odd that vinyl lovers are making digital files.
Great job, Steve. Each individual gets to figure out what sounds best to them. But there is a qualitative difference between digital and analog still. I have a large CD collection ( I used to have a large vinyl collection way back in the day) but I found I was listening to music less and less in recent times. I just wasn't enjoying music as much as before. My ears would get tired quickly. So, I finally bought a decent turntable and I'm enjoying the heck out of listening to vinyl, even older fairly beat-up vinyl. I just enjoy the vinyl sound more than the digital one. It sounds more "real" to me, for some reason. And I'm enjoying music again. So, that's MY story.
Thats 100% correct steve,,and the bottom line,,its to have the best possible source , that you feel comfortable with ,and enjoy your music and be happy with it, and have fun.
Steve summed it up perfectly...... Everything sounds DIFFERENT! I have plenty examples of vinyl beating digital and digital beating vinyl, depending on the particular master.
Vinyl provides me a way of listening to music without having to look at a screen. I have Roon and a tablet for that but as someone who works with computers, I worry it'll hurt my eyesight if I were to look at screens too often. When using vinyl, I control what songs I want played and they are all songs that I'm expecting as I know my vinyls well. :)
Born between the generation "steam" (fully mechanically) & "bit" (fully digital) I do not care, HOW Music is brought to me. I care about the MUSIC itself. And a live concert (as we used to have in pre-Covid-times) is the reference - for me. High Res streaming of a music-file, based on a good master is equal (for me) to an excellent pice of Venyl. What I like about "mechanically" reproduction of music: you can see it ! You can watch the Turntable. What I like about "digitally" reproduction of music: you can use it everywhere! So, what's better? Both ;)
A couple of observations: 1. It really depends on the original source recording technological used. If the original recording was on tape/analog then I noticed that the vinyl was superior. On modern music that is probably mastered digital from the get go - digital sounds better. 2. Vinyl is uber dependent on your equipment setup. $500 vinyl record system will sound radically different then a $5000 system. The gains on a digital system is not as much. There is a difference, but not as much 3. Vinyl is a commitment (cost, time, maintanance). Digital - just push a button and get to the point. 4. Digital is WAY cheaper, even on the high end. 5. If space is a premium, digital wins every time. The real question is what kind of experience do you want? Vinyl is if you want to work for your music and you enjoy that more than the music, and digital just gets you to the music. Don't get me wrong -- I enjoy spending way to much time futzing with my equipment as the next guy. But you have to realize some people just want to get on with and listening to their music. So price, convenience, and access - digital wins, Obsessive, detail oriented, collecting - vynil wins everytime. Either way life is short do whatever you prefer and just get on with it :)
@@cyclonasaurusrex1525 That is great if you listen to the top 100 radio blabla and I guess all that stuff which has almost become the new "folklore", i.e. Beatles, Stones, etc etc etc but if you tiptoe one inch away from that and want something still fairly popular, e.g. 90s to today's electronic, goth and such music, there are like 2-3 random tracks on streaming, often even only some nonsense DJ remix and so it is no good to have a worldwide (what does that even mean? Most Americans never leave the country...) streaming service that only streams shite as far as I'm concerned. So first I drag RU-vid where there is 270x more user uploaded stuff than on any streaming service and if I like it, I buy the CD and/or vinyl on Ebay for a few bucks. There is no risk in that... On the other hand, I spend a couple hundred bucks on new classical vinyl releases, e.g. Berlin Phil where there is no way in hell you can test listen to any of them before buying... just have to trust ze Germans ;)
When the satellite or the internet goes down, streamers will enjoy the sound of silence while Im rocking out.... I like to listen to music on qobuz to see if I want to buy the record.
Steve's traversal of the digital versus analog domestic playback conundrum makes a lot of sense. Personal preference is the key for listeners/consumers. I prefer the sound of vinyl playback, AND enjoy the high maintenance rituals regardless of degree of fidelity to the source. To each his own.
At 13:26+ you forgot to add the 45 RPM speed of record playback besides the 33.33 RPM, by the way, Steve. Anyhow, I listen to vinyl, CD, and music streaming in that order. Thumbs up, Steve. Another great, descriptive production.
Sometimes it might not be the medium: It could be the way it is recorded. Different era has different philosophies on how recording is done. It could be the way it is mastered and produced. It could be the ADC process and what goes on in the transfer. Choose music you like and perhaps consider how it is produced and enjoy the music.
I've tried all the streaming services and none of them sound as good as CD, SACD or lossless files. I don't know what the streaming services do to the recordings but they sound just as you said: lifeless; lacking range; flat soundstage etc. If you want the best from digital you have to play your files (or ripped discs) from a linux PC/laptop. The Pulse audio sound system on linux can be configured to upscale you files better than any hifi component. Configure the Pulse audio to output to your DAC in the highest rate it can handle (with the best resample algorithm and 32 bit floating point samples) and you will get the best sound out of it. You have to know a bit about computers to do this but it really offers the most astounding sound quality and pretty much any PC or laptop with a USB connection can be set up this way - it's not expensive ! Because the computer does all the digital work you don't need an expensive DAC so something like a Schiit Modi, a Topping or a Cambridge Audio "Dac Magic" will sound great. I love the digital remasters of old analog albums, particularly those that have been done with the Plangent system (that corrects wow and flutter on the original master tapes). For me it always beats the old records, many of which were mastered with all sorts of errors and problems and have often deteriorated from their pristine, new sound quality which obviates any theoretical benefits.
Also posted on Patreon page- Steve, sincerity in your videos is evident and I appreciate that. At times you seemed conflicted in this one which I certainly understand. I was in both the analog and digital eco systems until about two years ago when I made the decision to go totally digital. I have one main system that serves duty for music and movies and in order to maximize my budget I didn't feel I could do both well. As you mentioned convenience is a big factor for me; I can explore tons of artist and genres with merely a click and no additional cost. Plus, I feel those folks who aren't open to trying new things miss out. Purists may say 3D or Atmos for music is a terrible thing, or MQA for that matter, but if you never give it a listen how do you really know? I have a request. For us rebels who live purely in the digital domain, would you consider doing a video comparing the three main hi-res streaming services? For instance, I would enjoy hearing your input on MQA vs. non-MQA versions of the same tracks. I use an Audiolab 6000N Play via Kimber PBJ analog interconnects (just because I always to own a set) to a Denon X4700 in preamp mode with a Halo A52+ powering LSiM 707 series Polks so I have no MQA capability currently. In the past I used Tidal and a Node 2i but was lured away by the pricing for Amazon (U)HD as a Prime member. I liked the MQA sound and has less dropouts presumably because of the reduced bandwidth of the MQA technology. I'd be super curious what your trained ears hear via Qobuz and Amazon versus Tidal MQA. Another factor for me specifically is I'd have to use the internal DAC in say a Node to unpack MQA files and pass them to my system, the Node DAC appears inferior to my Audiolab, but I digress. You have capability I do not in using the same streaming device/DAC to playback both scenarios which is extremely valuable. Perhaps you’ll indulge my request and if others are interested in this comparo back me up! Thanks.
