Are records really better than CD's?

[StevenSurprenant]

E-Stat

I don't have the background of either of you folks and so I can't comment on hi-rez very much except to comment on my very brief experience with HDCD and SACD. I thought, depending on the quality of the recording, that it was an improvement over standard CD's. As I said, my exposure was very limited. However, neither sounded as good as vinyl (at it's best), colored or not. With that said...

Show me one system that isn't colored. I have never heard two speakers sound alike and since the whole purpose of owning a sound system is to reproduce what we hear in real life, how can any claim be made that vinyl is colored when everything we reproduce sound with is colored.

I would imagine that everyone on this board has a different system and that all these systems sound completely different. Sir T mixes on a system that is also different than any one of us has. I would imagine that his monitors don't sound like your stats, so it would be a complete surprise if what he hears in his studio would be what you hear in your home.

The point is that being colored is the name of the game. I have never heard anything in audio that compares to live in all it's fullness. There was one system that was very close, but then I only listened to one song on one CD on it that the store owner provided. That particular recording excelled at soundstaging and was very impressive.

I once listened to a group of musicians playing Canon in D and I was within 3 feet of them. It brought tears to my eyes and I couldn't speak without my voice breaking up. No stereo has ever effected me to that degree. I don't care if you're running stats, horns, line arrays, or the very best dynamic speakers that money can buy, nothing can replace live in that context.

Another time I was listening to Avalon speakers running with state of the art Spectral gear and sat there thinking how real it sounded. That was until my friend stood between the speakers and began mimicking the song and I immediately understood how lacking the system was. You should try that.

Don't get me wrong, I love audio... For what it is and don't fret over what it is not. We can be very pleased with how our systems sound, but, unless we delude ourselves, we cannot rightfully claim accuracy. What that leaves us with is a facsimile that we find pleasing. I can't tell you how many times I've thought, "that sounds real", as I'm sure you've also thought, but does it really?

Sir T's remark, "Vinyl lovers choose the disc because of its euphoric qualities, and some sort of physical romance with it. That is it.", implies that your friends 600 pound turntable is less accurate than his CD player. Do you agree with this?

I concur that higher word sizes and bit rates should sound better and at some point put vinyl to shame, but that's not living in the real world that most people have access to, nor is it supported by recording companies that mass produce what we find in the stores.

So, if I wanted to buy a system that is totally accurate, which speaker would I buy, which amp and preamp, and which digital front end would I look for? The problem is they all sound different, so tell me which ones are not colored.

The bottom line is this...

knowing that everything is colored, don't you think that it makes sense to get what sounds good and don't worry so much about accuracy?

I can understand Sir T's position in this because digital is his life and he has access to the very best, plus I also think there's a strong possibility that he has gotten used to digital and so it sounds more natural to him.

I don't think my vinyl sounds more real than digital, but the bass is better defined, the treble is better defined, soundstaging is better defined, well... everything is. I know you said that a good digital front end can sound as good, but after throwing thousands of dollars at it, I give up. Besides, I've heard better digital (in the stores) than I have ever heard at home, but I've never heard a digital system sound "over all" as good as vinyl does now.

One last thing...

As you know, I love stats, but I've heard many people say they don't like anything dipole. Why is that? This is more of a rhetorical question.

The only reason for this last question is because people have said that dipoles are less dynamic and they had some concern for the reflected waveform from the rear disrupting the signal from the front, causing peaks and dips. Thus they claim dipoles are less accurate. I don't see it that way, but the fact is I love the effect, accurate or not. But the real question is, are they correct? I think many box speakers sound like a box which many dipole owners can readily hear. I remember A-B ing a pair of Thiel speakers next to a pair of Magnepan's and the box sound of the Thiel was almost too much to bear.



Thanks!