LP vs Digital - Good Read

[square_wave]

Thad,
My point is pretty much the same ! I think we are on the same page...yay

My other point is NOT to elevate so called THEORETICAL ABSOLUTE TRUTHS. I guess that is where we both will disagree.
Statements about technology is one thing. Statements about how it affects us in our daily life is completely another. This is the same as the thinking and feeling dichotomy in personality types, if you know what i mean.

The extreme case of the thinking dichotomy can sometimes say that that an autorikshaw is 150 cc powerful, can carry x kg for a y distance so you should definitely reach the next city in approximately 15 hours and 21 minutes. So you do not need that car ! But will you reach in one piece ?

If you read the OP, you can see that the person has compared a digital download to an LP. He liked the LP. Many others also liked the LP. What does it mean ? It means nothing in a technological sense. But it is common sense that for that particular release, LP is what works best. So lets say, that this is your experience for most of your music. What is then superior technology for you ? It is the LP ! What if that guy spends the rest of his life studying the theory about all this ? And to his peril also decides to change course only if this superiority is proven in a so called gold standard DBT scenario. He will never buy what his senses has proven to him is superior ! It is called complete waste of time .

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

My other point is NOT to elevate so called THEORETICAL ABSOLUTE TRUTHS. I guess that is where we both will disagree.

Whoa! My page too!

I thought we were shouting at each other --- and it turns out we agree.

Nice way to start the day

But here we might have some difference, althouhg I suspect it is a difference of how we are reading it, rather than any real difference...

If you read the OP, you can see that the person has compared a digital download to an LP. He liked the LP. Many others also liked the LP.

Yep. Even allowing for all the possible reasons that they might have been fooling themselves, from expectation bias to an extra dB SPL when listening to the TT, The LP was the preferable experience for these guys. Accepted. And I'm still glad that the guy is going to listen to his dad's records.

It's the mental extrapolation that bothers me. This LP beats These CDs becomes LP vs Digital --- which it isn't. This is logic of the all things with four legs are tables kind.

LP is what works best. So lets say, that this is your experience for most of your music. What is then superior technology for you ? It is the LP !

Yes. I think I have covered this under the suggestion that the LP sound becomes the reference, and different means worse. (which it might be, or might not be). And no, I'm not going to try and force anything into anyone's ears because of what any theory might say.

But, if that person then wants to debate the issue, should we not ask for sensible parameters? Should we not expect logic? Should we not object if they come up with reasons that just don't hold water? Otherwise, let us not have the debate at all, and let there be no threads with titles like "lp vs digital."

Nobody needs to make, or discuss comparisons --- so why do we? And if comparisons are to be made, and they will go on being made, let us use proper methods.

 

[square_wave]

Even allowing for all the possible reasons that they might have been fooling themselves

This exactly the problem with discussions like these. You are not willing to accept the fact that they are not fooling themselves unless they pass some questionable gold standard DBT. Not really willing to accept the fact that folks can listen, use their senses to analyze information and choose what they want. If one wants to upgrade from an Rotel amplifier to a Mark Levinson, do we still need to do DBT ? Since it has been proven that DBT cannot distinguish between reasonably well designed amplifiers !

But, if that person then wants to debate the issue

That person does not want to debate the issue He wants to listen to LP

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

But, square_wave, you are still not reading what I wrote. I have not denied their experience; I have fully accepted it. Further more, I have no doubt at all that there are many LPs that sound better than their CD re-issues. Remastering may mean they simply do not deserve to have the same cover design: they do not contain the same sound --- and no, it is not necessary to blind-test to know this.

You are not willing to accept the fact that they are not fooling themselves unless they pass some questionable gold standard DBT.

I'm willing to let people do whatever they want this money, and to buy themselves the best possible experience, which includes many considerations, including the colour of the box and the name on it. It is their money. I'll do the same. There are many considerations to pride and pleasure of ownership.

If one wants to upgrade from an Rotel amplifier to a Mark Levinson, do we still need to do DBT

No. If you are convinced it is an upgrade, it will be. Enjoy

Since it has been proven that DBT cannot distinguish between reasonably well designed amplifiers !

If one really can't distinguish the things without knowing what they are, then the whole audiophile thing, and the vast amounts of money spent on it is all a myth. Please tell me it isn't so!

Sadly, though, I can do no more than remind you of J Gordon Holt's words

Do you see any signs of future vitality in high-end audio?

Vitality? Don't make me laugh. Audio as a hobby is dying, largely by its own hand. As far as the real world is concerned, high-end audio lost its credibility during the 1980s, when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls (double-blind testing, for example) that had legitimized every other serious scientific endeavor since Pascal. [This refusal] is a source of endless derisive amusement among rational people and of perpetual embarrassment for me, because I am associated by so many people with the mess my disciples made of spreading my gospel. For the record: I never, ever claimed that measurements don't matter. What I said (and very often, at that) was, they don't always tell the whole story. Not quite the same thing.

(The whole interview at Stereophile)

If you really can't tell the difference between two boxes when someone puts a curtain in the way, then buy the one you like the colour of. If you can still hear the difference, and it is the same difference, then you may say there was no point in the validation. Whatever: it is about enjoyment. Enjoy!

 

[square_wave]

DBT / Curtains ?

What is Gordon Holt saying ?

Audiophiles are not open to tests wherein they do not know what has been changed? I know many audiophiles who love this kind of test.

Or

Audiophiles not open to the kind of mainstream DBT testing method that DB-heads are fixated upon the one with random listeners / short music samples / switchers etc...

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Well, I believe that he is talking about, primarily, about the industry and its associated media.

What are we, as individuals, going to do when we test stuff? Are we going to hire a van full of audio engineers in white coats to set it all up for us? Well, it would be a nice idea, but sure, let's be practical! Similarly, with measurements of different sound: are we going to invest in

Audiophiles not open to the kind of mainstream DBT testing method that DB-heads are fixated upon the one with random listeners / short music samples / switchers etc...

I sometimes wonder if some "audiophiles" have ever tried actually listening.

 

[Staxxx]

I sometimes wonder if some "audiophiles" have ever tried actually listening.

I am with you with this. That is why in all my posts I keep reiterating to OPs that you need to listen and not always ask for opinions (although it is nice to have re-enforcement of your thoughts)....after a point it is all rather relative and no opinion is really wrong. One will get to learn the sound that one prefers...and even that may change with time.

 

[square_wave]

I sometimes wonder if some "audiophiles" have ever tried actually listening.

That is what the clever ones do. That is one of the reasons why they do not need DBT most of the time

They listen and they know what works for them. Cost, color does not matter.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

It matters to me. Perhaps its just that I'm honest with myself about it.

Preference is dependent on so many things, of which sound, as we perceive it, is just one. If you think that experience and even training, can make it otherwise, then there is plenty to suggest you are wrong. Start here.
And, just in case you think it isn't going to be worth even clicking the link, because what is the guy going to be able to tell an experienced listener, heck, he probably hasn't heard well-set-up systems himself ...and all that:

...Sean Olive is Director of Acoustic Research for Harman International, a major manufacturer of audio products for consumer, professional and automotive spaces. He directs the Corporate R&D group, and oversees the subjective evaluation of new audio products...

You believe we have ears. So do I. You don't seem to believe that we have psychology too!

 

[square_wave]

I think we are just going round and round like a broken record. The reason why I do not believe in the usual method DBT test is because such tests cannot discern the differences between a basic dvd player and a high end source or between a basic power amplifier and a high end one. So these tests have some fundamental problems. Dont you think so ?

I believe that the System B featured below will sound F-A-R superior to the system A. The only change in both systems is the source and amplifier.

System A
350 watts per channel Ahuja amplifier ( a basic good amp)
3000 rupee dvd player ( a basic good source)
YG Acoustics Anat Signature IIIs

System B
YG Acoustics Anat Signature IIIs, Tenor Audio preamp and monoblock amps, Soulution SACD/CD player and Bryston music server ( This was a RMAF system).

How about a more accurate method of blind testing ?

 

[jenson]

a recent vinyl convert here...what i really liked about Vinyl was
1. a sound quality which i absolutely adore, lovely bass, sweet mid-range and soft treble, i guess it's EQ agrees with me
2. but most importantly, i found vinyl's to be very rhythmic! it may have to do with the rhythm of the motor and the whole mechanism, but one cant diagree with the fact that vinyl's gets your foot tapping, it's very rhythmic in nature, songs just keep flowing.

comparing with digital, i dont have the best digital source, so it would be unfair...however, comparing i with what i have, cd's lost some detail, i guess "fullness" is a better word. all said, i would parallelly love to pursue music in vinyl format (psst, i already am )

with regards to vinyl vs cd...both have their pros and cons. but Vinyl wins hands down in terms of people who like to maintain a connection with their music.

 

[jls001]

How about a more accurate method of blind testing ?

I remember reading somewhere that Stereophile editor John Atkinson performed very well on blind tests. I am no longer sure what was the exact context but the point of that article was that it takes trained ears to be able to identify changes in an audio chain.

From my limited personal experience, I readily admit that an audio engineer friend of mine who has spent lots of time in the studio listening to and creating mixes has a much more acute ear than I do in discerning imbalances. And I believe this is NOT because he has more sensitive ears than I do, but because he knows what to listen to.

Another acquaintance hears things in a setup that I just don't hear. I believe this gentleman also trained as an audio engineer.

Another friend can hear channel imbalances very well. This on a system that sounded perfectly fine to my untrained ears. This friend, too, used to be an audio engineer long ago.

Something about training? And experience?

To add: even our very own Bhagwan has a much more acute hearing than I'll ever have (from my personal experience) which is likely developed because of his many years of critical listening.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

square_wave, you can define your own tests. There is no limitation other than not knowing to what you are listening. There is no requirement at all for one-minute switchovers, for instance. I guess these can be useful for looking for certain, specific things, but I can certainly sympathise with those who don't like them for choosing a system.

In reality, most of our buying auditioning is limited anyway. When we do get to compare two things in a shop, for instance, our time is limited. If we are a good potential customer, we might be lucky and get an afternoon.

There's no way that I'm suggesting that every day buying decisions must be made on the basis of a blind test. I've never even had that option!

But, if one is going to collect gear, or individual components, and test them against each other, making assertions based on the outcome, a sighted test always must be suspect. It just has to be. Don't listen to me, look at the results from people like Sean Olive, mentioned above.

I've always had confidence in my ears. I maintained that confidence up to the point when an audiologist told me my hearing is now officially crap*. Mind you, that does not mean that I'm giving up listening to audio, and certainly not giving up talking about it --- but the main thing is I no longer have confidence in being able to assess a correct balance because, damnit, I know I can't. That means that now, I have to adjust my music until I think it sounds right to me, but I'll never again know. It's a piss off. But then, sometimes the world decides to be other than what we think.

The difference with pros is not that their ears are any different, but that they know what they are listening to: the hand reaches for the right slider on the graphic equaliser. They know what it will do, and to what.


*That's not how she put it, and a really deaf person would just laugh at me for saying such a thing, but, for a music lover, who loves the detail in his music, I'd describe a roll-off that starts at 1,000khz as crap. Not a sob story: I have plenty of music listening left, but I am, personally, never going to venture my opinion that system A is better in the high end than system B. Those particular days are over.

 

[square_wave]

@Thad,

Agree in general with your views.

A sighted test can sometimes be very misleading especially when the differences are minuscule. The mind will manufacture things !

A very important aspect is synergy. A certain amp which I liked with a certain cd player was not very desirable when I had a different cd player. A speaker / room which cannot resolve certain frequencies well can make a very resolving source or amplifier sound very undesirable. In another setup where the speaker/ room is extremely capable, the same source or amplifier will sound glorious ! So even if you do a DBT test, you will O-N-L-Y know what sounds better in the T-E-S-T system. The result could be due to various factors including the listening capability of the test demographic.

So things are not so black and white. Trial and error method, experience and exposure is what will result in a very nice sounding music system.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Yes, I agree with your views too! :lol:

So, whatever test one does, the parameters of the test have to be understood, and also the extraneous influences such as room influence. A blind test does not, necessarily, establish that any given piece of equipment is better or worse than another in different circumstances, although if, given all those circumstances, it does not give the same results as a sighted test, then something is wrong.

Somebody mentioned being "good at blind tests." How can anybody be good or bad at blind tests --- unless there is an expected answer that they must get right or wrong. If a person scores very well at returning the same results blind as sighted, then I'd rather say they are good at sighted tests! In other words, they have a higher ability to put the psychology aside. But Sean Olive's work reveals that even professionals cannot be relied on to do that.

Trial and error method, experience and exposure is what will result in a very nice sounding music system.

Yes it is --- and this is going to be true whatever the test method. And yes, if a person is happy with their buying, setup and listening, they might not even be interested in comparative testing of any sort, but only in getting on with listening to the music. I can go for that!