The reason this argument goes awry is that we're not comparing apples to apples and it's impossible to keep him focused.
If you are going to compare apples with apples, then your comparison of vinyl versus CD would be impossible.Both formats are mastered differently, both operate differently, and both have format based routines that if not implemented properly will result if poor performance. Apples to apples comparison would be two different carts on the same tonearm. Apples to apples would be the comparison between the same recording on CD and SACD, or DVD-A and CD.

This tells me you don't know exactly what the focus is.



The "Starry Night" album by Julio Iglesias that I mentioned sounds tonally identical on CD and vinyl. Even the soundstage is the same, but the difference is the amount of micro detail and harmonics which goes a long way in making the music more vibrant and creates a secondary effect of separating things in the soundstage.
All this tells me is that your vinyl setup has more resolution than your digital gear. Secondly you don't know if identical masters were used for both, so you comparison is fraught with problems, which profoundly biases your opinion.



BTW, this album and others where I have both the CD and the vinyl is one of the reasons I think Sir T is wrong about bloated Mid bass and distortion. Besides, I don't think that all phono cartridges sound the same or that they all have bloated mid bass. I would then assume that the record was recorded that way, in which case, it's the engineers fault and not the playback equipment. His comments on this show a strong bias against all vinyl which doesn't support his position.
Steve, without a direct comparison(the original master) how do you know which format is presenting exactly what the engineer wanted you to hear? You don't, you are using your subjective opinion.

I want to put this another way. Have you ever compared a 35mm master tape with a QC CD master, and a master pressing of vinyl all at once? I have in Doug Sax's studio with his custom made turntable and one of the most neutral sounding carts I have ever heard. As good as the vinyl sounded, it did not sound like my my 35mm master. The CD was a lot closer to what I heard from my master. Unlike you, I happen to have very high quality digital gear(my pre-amp in my signature processor everything at 48/354.2 or 384khz sample rate) so my perspective on digital is not gimped or based on midfi digital gear.

I would like to point out to you some excerpts from this great NPR discussion I was pointed to on another website.

DANKOSKY: So, first of all, I'll ask you, Scott: vinyl or CD?

(SOUNDBITE OF LAUGHTER)

METCALFE: I enjoy both formats, but my preference is definitely CD.

DANKOSKY: Now, why CD?

METCALFE: Well, I think it has a lot to do with the fact that I'm primarily a recording engineer, as far as working with music. And it's - the closer thing to what I'm sending into the recorder is very much what I'm getting back out. With analog formats, although the sound can be very pleasing in certain styles, it's definitely imparting its own sound on it. And I think, to an extent, it's that sound that some people are really drawn to. But it's nice as an engineer to have the confidence of knowing that what I'm putting into - in most cases these days, the computer - is pretty close to what I'm going to get out.

DANKOSKY: Sean Olive, I have to ask you. I think I know your answer, but vinyl or CD?

OLIVE: Definitely CD.

DANKOSKY: Yeah? So tell me why.

OLIVE: Well, I mean, I grew up listening to records up until about '85, when the CD was already out. And I was involved in testing loudspeakers up at the National Research Council in Canada. And we were testing cartridges at that time, and it was quite apparent that the amount of distortion coming out of these devices was very high compared to CD. So what we found was that vinyl was a limiting factor in our ability to do accurate and reliable listening tests on loudspeakers, and we had to find a more reliable and more accurate medium.

Why Vinyl Sounds Better Than CD, Or Not : NPR

So reason why I made my statement about vinyl is based on my experience comparing the master to the CD or vinyl. It is the sound characteristic of the format that is so appealing to audiophiles. Audiophiles do not like neutrality or accuracy, or they would not have a preference towards vinyl OR tube amplifiers and preamplifiers(or at least quite a few of them). The very things that vinyl lovers like about vinyl, they dislike about CD. CD do not have a sound 'characteristic", what you record is what you get. CD does not enhance or highlight anything unless that is the intentions of the engineer. That is not the case with vinyl.

So, if you like salt and pepper on your audio, then by all means listen to vinyl through tube based equipment. If you want accuracy and neutrality, then the CD is your bag. I have seven grammy award winning mastering engineers that support this.

When you get a chance to listen to a master tape, and the formats the music was released on, come back and talk to me. We can then discuss this BS about keeping focus.