|
|
Post by bluemeanies on Jun 25, 2016 9:20:50 GMT -5
Just wanted to get opinions about people's feelings on the differences of audio playback sources. Currently I am using TIDAL which streams CD quality playback. I have compared this with my own cd's playing thru my OPPO 93 with my 2channel system which is made up of Bob Latino tube mono-blocks and a Grace pre/amp/dac monitoring system.
No complaints. When comparing the two cd vs streaming I cannot notice any difference, at least my ears do not notice any radical change pro/con for cd or streaming.
I am wondering if anyone here has compared all three, cd, streaming and vinyl playback and if so what are their outtake on the physical end result of the systems performance.
Not having a TT I was unable to a have a final analysis to voice an opinion about the benefits of vinyl playback.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 25, 2016 10:12:46 GMT -5
If Tidal offers CD quality like it says then it "should" be offering a bit perfect stream. If it does this then I don't see why there should be a noticeable difference in quality to say your CD's. There may well be a noticeable difference with vinyl because their mastering process and playback process tends to be different.
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 25, 2016 10:16:18 GMT -5
I've compared all three plus ripped CDs on an external Harddrive. To me my pecking order from best to worst is Vinyl; most dynamic and nuanced. High labor required, full LP compilation CD; accurate, but missing something Ripped ; about the same as CD sound wise, plus one for convenience Tidal; best streaming quality and high value for convenience. This is the good guy!  He's offering tube luxuriousness to all formats! everyone needs to feel the power of the glow!!  |
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator 
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,865
|
Post by LCSeminole on Jun 25, 2016 10:41:10 GMT -5
Vinyl; most dynamic and nuanced. High labor required, full LP compilation CD; accurate, but missing something "but missing something", this is the question that so many fans of vinyl can never seem to give me a satisfactory answer, and it's probably because I'm a fan of the compact disc/digital sound. |
|
|
|
Post by jlafrenz on Jun 25, 2016 12:24:12 GMT -5
Vinyl; most dynamic and nuanced. High labor required, full LP compilation CD; accurate, but missing something "but missing something", this is the question that so many fans of vinyl can never seem to give me a satisfactory answer, and it's probably because I'm a fan of the compact disc/digital sound. For me vinyl vs. streaming isn't necessarily about audible differences in listening. It's about the mind set and the mood. Kind of like taking the interstate vs. the back roads. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Jun 25, 2016 12:32:19 GMT -5
"but missing something", this is the question that so many fans of vinyl can never seem to give me a satisfactory answer, and it's probably because I'm a fan of the compact disc/digital sound. For me vinyl vs. streaming isn't necessarily about audible differences in listening. It's about the mind set and the mood. Kind of like taking the interstate vs. the back roads. back roads = dirt roads = ticks and pops |
|
|
|
Post by Loop 7 on Jun 25, 2016 12:45:18 GMT -5
I'll add one more ingredient to the mix. I'm a big fan of software that replaces operating system core audio. There are so many but I prefer Amarra for TIDAL over CDs any day of the week.
|
|
|
|
Post by JKCashin on Jun 25, 2016 13:11:47 GMT -5
CD; accurate, but missing something Ripped ; about the same as CD sound wise, plus one for convenience Ripped should be identical to CD. If not, something is wrong. 1010010100100000101001001001010 is the same as 1010010100100000101001001001010... if you're using the same DAC. |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 25, 2016 13:15:35 GMT -5
CD; accurate, but missing something Ripped ; about the same as CD sound wise, plus one for convenience Ripped should be identical to CD. If not, something is wrong. 1010010100100000101001001001010 is the same as 1010010100100000101001001001010... if you're using the same DAC. Bingo!! Choice of multiple DACs makes a small difference.  |
|
|
|
Post by JKCashin on Jun 25, 2016 13:41:24 GMT -5
Ahh. OK, I use the XMC-1 built in DAC... so when I play a CD on my PS-3, or play the ripped copy from my Mac Mini, it's the same thing. Now if I were to use the analogue outputs of a CD player, then there would be a difference. Whether or not it was a perceptible difference would be down to differences in the DAC, plus the listeners ability to hear said differences... but it sounds like you already know that. So given the same recording, and the same bits (assuming you could stream the same bits from somewhere), then the only difference should be the Vinyl vs. all the others, at which point you're comparing the DACs analogue output vs. the record players analog (obviously) output.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 25, 2016 13:48:45 GMT -5
Ahh. OK, I use the XMC-1 built in DAC... so when I play a CD on my PS-3, or play the ripped copy from my Mac Mini, it's the same thing. Now if I were to use the analogue outputs of a CD player, then there would be a difference. Whether or not it was a perceptible difference would be down to differences in the DAC, plus the listeners ability to hear said differences... but it sounds like you already know that. So given the same recording, and the same bits (assuming you could stream the same bits from somewhere), then the only difference should be the Vinyl vs. all the others, at which point you're comparing the DACs analogue output vs. the record players analog (obviously) output. Interestingly - and this is only for the PS3 - the sound IS different when played from a PS3 digital output for CDs. I believe the ps3 resamples it in some way before sending it out. It sounds slightly different. Now take a regular DVD player and compare it to another source, it sounds very close. But I think it's a software implementation on the PS3. If I remember the PS3 has a limited digital volume control and maybe that's what is causing the difference. |
|
|
|
Post by JKCashin on Jun 25, 2016 13:56:55 GMT -5
Didn't know that!
|
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on Jun 25, 2016 14:56:23 GMT -5
When I switched from a PS3 to an Oppo, I noticed a big difference. Now you tell me that the Sony was mucking with the data stream.
|
|
|
|
Post by Raven on Jun 25, 2016 21:41:51 GMT -5
Just wanted to get opinions about people's feelings on the differences of audio playback sources. Currently I am using TIDAL which streams CD quality playback. I have compared this with my own cd's playing thru my OPPO 93 with my 2channel system which is made up of Bob Latino tube mono-blocks and a Grace pre/amp/dac monitoring system. No complaints. When comparing the two cd vs streaming I cannot notice any difference, at least my ears do not notice any radical change pro/con for cd or streaming. I am wondering if anyone here has compared all three, cd, streaming and vinyl playback and if so what are their outtake on the physical end result of the systems performance. Not having a TT I was unable to a have a final analysis to voice an opinion about the benefits of vinyl playback. Thanks Depends on mastering, for example I've compared few LPs (Elton John Honky Château etc.) vs their .flac version Compared LPs sound more enjoyable, more life like. You've got to try it yourself because vinyl requires some investment and more labor it's not for everyone a bit like tubes I guess. Before I started to invest some money I found non working old Sansui SR222 (for free) and fixed it plus bought basic MM phono stage Vinyl's sound was so pleasant to my ears that eventually I've upgraded TT/cart and phono stage as well... |
|
|
|
Post by sidvicious on Jun 26, 2016 19:43:29 GMT -5
First of all, I would like to say that I have and do enjoy, CD's, Vinyl and Streaming. To quote Raven, Vinyl is more of an investment and to quote MonkuMonku, their is dirt and clicks, but that is more about cleaning, but can be a results of poor mastering. Vinyl when done at a higher level and yes I have been through a fair share of turntablaes (read some of my earlier post) can be just breath taking My vinyl system at this moment would indeed with the right record, shock many of you for the low noise and sound quality, but it was an investment that I was willing to make having heard what vinyl can really do, but even for me with as many turntables as I have owned to include a total of three left, there are limits to what I will and won't do. My Digital system, which consist of an Aurender N100H through a Audio Research DAC 8 and Aurender UC-500 converter can be every bit as good depending on the music as vinyl and I enjoy them all. I'm not the person that will tell you that Vinyl always sounds better than CD, because it doesn't, i.e , I went to a listening party last Friday at one of my local dealers shops after closing had a listening party and we previewed the latest Radio Head Album/Digital Download of Moon Pool. This was done by my dealer and one of my favorite record shops. What we, a party of 12 found out was the colored vinyl was poorly mastered and had clicks and pops and was just awful (source system was Audio Research Ref 150, Ref 6, SME 20.2 turntable with a Lyra Atlas cartridge. and Vandersteen 5A Carbons and a Aurender N10 with a Audio Research DAC 8. The black vinyl sounded pretty good, but on side C the Aurender sounded much better.
What I concluded was this wasn't the best pressing and based off of this listening session, I bought the CD, it was a more consistent listen. My dealer will be doing this again next month. There are some things that just sound better on CD, due to mastering, because with vinyl's resurgence a lot of engineers are just trying to mass produce vinyl quickly without any sense of quality and that's why you have people like Analog Productions around. To LCSemonile, the reason it's hard to describe what's missing is sound is the hardest thing to put into words, but I'll try. Depending on the system, tubes vs solid state and in this example, I will use a Solid State Amp and a Tube preamp and Tube phone amp, both of which I own and have owned all tube stuff before is, if you have been to a fair number of concerts and I have recorded some on my phone just for 10-20secs to hear the live instruments (and compare to my home system) and distinguish them from my equipment. With tube gear the instruments sound like the instruments at the concert or more like the real thing, why well to some degree the musicians use tube amps, ie guitars if a rock concert and that sound is familiar to you. Also as Keith and others say it's distortion, but it's distortion that is both pleasing and familiar to you, a guitar sounds like a guitar, a violin sounds like a violin. Tubes do this to a greater degree than solid state, but the combination of both a solid state amp gives you both the power and pleasing distortion that people love and it's familiar to you. Some CD's sound compressed and vinyl unless it's a digital direct copy (DMM-Direct Metal Master) can sound very bad. There are some 24-bit CD's that I own that sound better than vinyl. Remember we are in an age right now that digital should be killing vinyl and vinyl, which has outlasted all other formats should rightfully be dead, but to a great degree it's music isn't compressed and sounds better than lonely MP3's which the kids are discovering and they will possibly be tomorrows collectors. Their is even some music that has never been reproduced on either CD or Vinyl, let alone a digital download.
To answer JKCashin, you are right digital rips should sound the same as their CD Counter parts, but unfortunately they don't always and I found this out upon listening to and later buying an Aurender. The Aurender is indeed better and the N10 can be way better, but $8000 is a lot of money and this can be DAC depended and I'm using a UC-500, which converts the signal from my Aurender to my DAC 8 coaxial, because the DAC 8 is a bit long in the tooth and soon to be replaced by the DAC 9. Also Digital Music Server Manufacterers like Aurender are not trying to reinvent the world by making built in DACs they want you to come up with the DAC of your choice because think about it if the DAC in your expensive component sounds like crap that creates more of a problem for them because the DAC and the source are linked together in one component. When you factor in Tidal or other hirez places it can be a little to no better. I have heard hirez files that sound no better to worst than the CD's, because they are just oversampled. Oversampling just for the sake of oversampling doesn't necessarily include more information in the actual music. My point guys is I enjoy all, but on a lot of earlier albums and some newer albums, they are just mastered better and through my equipment sound better i.e. warmer or smoother sounding or even more real sounding like being at a concert. Enjoy all of the formats and take none of them for granted, each one has it's own pluses or minuses and believe it or not Reel to Reel is making a comeback with some highend decks that are used by some Audiophiles as playback sources of expensive close to original master tapes or mothers. Some people are talking about cassettes coming back, but I would have to see that one to believe it. |
|
|
|
Post by etc6849 on Jun 26, 2016 20:20:19 GMT -5
Really depends on how each are mastered. For example, so many of the "remastered" albums are much louder than the original CD, which means more compression and less dynamics (due to what many would call poor mastering). It's not CD's fault that all the marketers and labels want CD's loud as heck, but it is a fact that most CD's are mastered this way. Take a look at this loudness database: dr.loudness-war.info/What I try to do is use the database and find the particular version of an album that has the highest DR (dynamic range) rating. I will listen to a digital rip even if it's sourced from vinyl, if its DR is really higher. From a scientific standpoint, CD is the most capable of the three wrt to dynamic range. The noise floor will depend on how a track is recorded, but if you look at the s/n ratios for analogue tape versus a good ADC it is easy to see what studios should use (from a scientific/performance aspect). From a practical standpoint, it comes down to how an album was recorded and mastered. I understand that people like vinyl though. I grew up in the CD era, but understand the nostalgia and that folks believe vinyl has more dynamic range due to how things were mastered back then. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jun 26, 2016 22:32:39 GMT -5
I'm with the other guys who believe that the mastering is far more important that the format from which it is played. I have some LP's that sound better (to my ears) than a CD, SACD or streamed version. I have some CD's that sound better than LP's, SACD's or hi def streaming, because the mastering on the SACD and streamed versions are excessively "blown up". It's like the mixer/engineer was trying to prove that he could get more dynamic range, rather than reproduce the music the way it was recorded. I have some CD's where, compared to the vinyl versions, there are instruments completely missing. Or drowned out, like the guy doing the mastering decided that they weren't needed. But like magic they're audible on the SACD version. The audio engineer has a great deal of influence over what we get to hear, for example compare Alan Parsons with Andy Jackson on their work for Pink Floyd. In many cases that influence is far greater than what format their work turns up on.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by bluemeanies on Jun 26, 2016 22:38:44 GMT -5
I've compared all three plus ripped CDs on an external Harddrive. To me my pecking order from best to worst is Vinyl; most dynamic and nuanced. High labor required, full LP compilation CD; accurate, but missing something Ripped ; about the same as CD sound wise, plus one for convenience Tidal; best streaming quality and high value for convenience. This is the good guy! :D He's offering tube luxuriousness to all formats! everyone needs to feel the power of the glow!! View AttachmentNot surprised about YOUR pecking order. TIDAL being the least dynamic? Of course all of this is made up of opinions. That was in part the reason for the post. But I do disagreed that TIDAL streaming is the weakest leak in music quality. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,274
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 27, 2016 13:26:49 GMT -5
I have a very serious suggestion/question here - specifically for those who are convinced that vinyl sounds good.
Have you ever tried taking your favorite vinyl album, playing it on your favorite turntable and cartridge, with your favorite phono preamp - and then recording it at 24/96k or 24/192k using a decent analog-to-digital converter? Assuming that the entire "vinyl playback signal chain" is simply adding something you like to the sound, and that the digital playback chain can reproduce whatever you feed it very accurately, then this should enable you to have all the benefits of BOTH at the same time. You'll get the sound of the vinyl album, and the vinyl playback signal chain, plus the easy backup and storage, and the permanence, of a digital file. In fact, a bunch of guys who like vinyl could chip in, buy one really good vinyl system that none of them could individually afford, and one really good A/D converter, and then each use it to convert their records to digital. (Of course, they can't legally buy one copy of the album and make copies for everyone... )
You can see why no company has done this: because, from a licensing standpoint, it's a nightmare. Technically only people who own the record are legally entitled to make a digital copy of it - and only for themselves. but, for a company who already sells digital downloads, they would just be "special re-masters". I wonder how many people would be willing to pay a little extra to get "high-res digital recordings with that high end vinyl sound". They could even offer your choice of several different turntables and cartridges.
All musings aside, though..... anyone who thinks that "digital takes something away from the sound" should be eager to try this experiment... that way you can see for yourself if the digital recording of a vinyl source really sounds any different than the original vinyl source itself, or if the vinyl is just ADDING something... and the digital recording is able to reproduce it accurately... Which would prove, once and for all, that the differences really lie in the mastering and the analog reproduction signal chain. (Even a $39 Sound Blaster audio card should be good enough as an A/D converter to prove the point.)
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,952
|
Post by hemster on Jun 27, 2016 13:35:00 GMT -5
I have a very serious suggestion/question here - specifically for those who are convinced that vinyl sounds good.
Have you ever tried taking your favorite vinyl album, playing it on your favorite turntable and cartridge, with your favorite phono preamp - and then recording it at 24/96k or 24/192k using a decent analog-to-digital converter? Assuming that the entire "vinyl playback signal chain" is simply adding something you like to the sound, and that the digital playback chain can reproduce whatever you feed it very accurately, then this should enable you to have all the benefits of BOTH at the same time. You'll get the sound of the vinyl album, and the vinyl playback signal chain, plus the easy backup and storage, and the permanence, of a digital file. In fact, a bunch of guys who like vinyl could chip in, buy one really good vinyl system that none of them could individually afford, and one really good A/D converter, and then each use it to convert their records to digital. (Of course, they can't legally buy one copy of the album and make copies for everyone... )
You can see why no company has done this: because, from a licensing standpoint, it's a nightmare. Technically only people who own the record are legally entitled to make a digital copy of it - and only for themselves. but, for a company who already sells digital downloads, they would just be "special re-masters". I wonder how many people would be willing to pay a little extra to get "high-res digital recordings with that high end vinyl sound". They could even offer your choice of several different turntables and cartridges.
All musings aside, though..... anyone who thinks that "digital takes something away from the sound" should be eager to try this experiment... that way you can see for yourself if the digital recording of a vinyl source really sounds any different than the original vinyl source itself, or if the vinyl is just ADDING something... and the digital recording is able to reproduce it accurately... Which would prove, once and for all, that the differences really lie in the mastering and the analog reproduction signal chain. (Even a $39 Sound Blaster audio card should be good enough as an A/D converter to prove the point.)
I like the idea of a communal enterprise where people pool together and buy vinyl as a pool of buyers! I won't be a part of the pool as I no longer own vinyl or vinyl gear but would be watching the game keenly from the sidelines. |
|
He's offering tube luxuriousness to all formats!
