Interview with John Atkinson

[E-Stat]

Sure , not all of them are winners, but some performances are second to none. They have remastered them however, and some sound fantastic...Chet Baker: Live in 64 and 79 has become my favorite recording to listen to of his.

I'm glad you've found some good musical content in those pre-multichannel oldies.

rw

[poppachubby]

No... You just missed the point... There is a good reason to use analog currently: sound quality... Take that out of the equation and what reason is there to hold on to it, other than nostalgia?

I haven't missed any point. As I said, you aren't aware of the difference that exists in high end analog. There is more involved than simple musical information.

Have you heard an LP 12 with several mods, or an equivelant table?

The reality is, digital is barely out of its diapers.

[Ajani]

I haven't missed any point. As I said, you aren't aware of the difference that exists in high end analog. There is more involved than simple musical information.

Have you heard an LP 12 with several mods, or an equivelant table?

The reality is, digital is barely out of its diapers.

So are you saying that high end analog is superior to High Resolution Digital? No one in this thread has disagreed with John Atkinson's statement that Vinyl is superior to CD, but High Res is superior to Vinyl....

[poppachubby]

I don't want to sound rude, but I couldn't care less what JA has to say. My own ears can tell me what I need to know.

I just think you should seek out some of the things you say are becoming obsolete, and listen for yourself.

I have a digital set up, although not the worlds greatest. I have the sound card with digital inputs and outputs. I have a DAC. I have a CDP. Infact, I've researched digital quite a bit and know what I like to hear. Beyond my own gear, I hear what's available at the local shops as it comes in.

Have you done the same with analog? Preferences aside, you may be in for a shock.

[E-Stat]

I am left with the impression that audiophiles are more married to their equipment than listening to music recorded at the highest quality ever attained.

So, all we need to do is leave behind a half century's worth of the world's finest music that is not available "at the highest quality ever attained"?

rw

[Ajani]

I don't want to sound rude, but I couldn't care less what JA has to say. My own ears can tell me what I need to know.

I just think you should seek out some of the things you say are becoming obsolete, and listen for yourself.

I have a digital set up, although not the worlds greatest. I have the sound card with digital inputs and outputs. I have a DAC. I have a CDP. Infact, I've researched digital quite a bit and know what I like to hear. Beyond my own gear, I hear what's available at the local shops as it comes in.

Have you done the same with analog? Preferences aside, you may be in for a shock.

Also not to be rude, but if you don't care what JA has to say then you are clearly in the wrong thread.... The entire discussion about MC versus Stereo is based on JA's comments in the interview...

I doubt I'd be suprised by Vinyl, as I expect it to sound at least as good as and more likely better than CD... I haven't used a turntable in about 15 years, but I still have good memories from my teenage years of using a turntable, CD player and cassette tape in my rig (I used to collect all 3 mediums at that time)... My lack of interest in currently using a turntable is about convience and lack of current music in that format, not because I am one of those hardcore digital lovers...

High Res music servers intrigue me because they have the potential to answer both mainstream and audiophile concerns: convenience and sound quality...

[poppachubby]

I am impressed with what digital has been able to do in the last few years. But honestly, it's a little bit like a cat chasing it's tail. It seems like every year, there is a new format or new method to take us into the next level.

I will sit back and see how it plays out. Eventually digital will have to fall on something long term that can be built upon.

Philips TDA 154x DACs are making a comeback in high end digital gear. This is my personal favorite. This situation is the point I am trying to make. They had something that sounded great, yet moved away from it in the name of "furthering" the technology. Now engineers, manufacturers and enthusiasts are realising the beauty of this ancient tech.

What's possible isn always what's best.

[Ajani]

So, all we need to do is leave behind a half century's worth of the world's finest music that is not available "at the highest quality ever attained"?

rw

Yep, sounds fairly reasonable to me... Who needs more than 37 albums anyway?

[poppachubby]

I haven't used a turntable in about 15 years, but I still have good memories from my teenage years of using a turntable, CD player and cassette tape in my rig (I used to collect all 3 mediums at that time)... My lack of interest in currently using a turntable is about convience and lack of current music in that format, not because I am one of those hardcore digital lovers...
.

Lack of current music? C'mon. As a hip/hop and reggae lover this is a surprising statement. Those two genres lead the way in vinyl releases. Anyhow, I bet some of the biggest gains in this hobby have been made in analog over the last 15 - 20 years. Cartridges alone are reason enough to reconsider...

I;m gonna get me some new shoes now...

[Ajani]

I am impressed with what digital has been able to do in the last few years. But honestly, it's a little bit like a cat chasing it's tail. It seems like every year, there is a new format or new method to take us into the next level.

I will sit back and see how it plays out. Eventually digital will have to fall on something long term that can be built upon.

Philips TDA 154x DACs are making a comeback in high end digital gear. This is my personal favorite. This situation is the point I am trying to make. They had something that sounded great, yet moved away from it in the name of "furthering" the technology. Now engineers, manufacturers and enthusiasts are realising the beauty of this ancient tech.

What's possible isn always what's best.

I think the biggest issue has been tying digital to physical media... CD, HDCD, SACD, DVDA or Blu Ray all need specific transports (and some are not designed to output a signal to a DAC)... High Res downloads use your computer/Music Server as transport... so all you need is software to play the different formats (and/or output them to your DAC).... So no need to buy a new player everytime a new High Res format is released... Just do a software update...

So different High Res (download) formats won't end up killing each other like DVDA and SACD did...

[Ajani]

Lack of current music? C'mon. As a hip/hop and reggae lover this is a surprising statement. Those two genres lead the way in vinyl releases. Anyhow, I bet some of the biggest gains in this hobby have been made in analog over the last 15 - 20 years. Cartridges alone are reason enough to reconsider...

I;m gonna get me some new shoes now...

Lack of current music relative to CD and downloads... I do see many current hip/hop and reggae albums available on Vinyl now (such a shame I can't say the same about SACD)...

[Ajani]

I;m gonna get me some new shoes now...

How did that clown manage to spam up the site so fast?

[poppachubby]

I think the biggest issue has been tying digital to physical media... CD, HDCD, SACD, DVDA or Blu Ray all need specific transports (and some are not designed to output a signal to a DAC)... High Res downloads use your computer/Music Server as transport... so all you need is software to play the different formats (and/or output them to your DAC).... So no need to buy a new player everytime a new High Res format is released... Just do a software update...

So different High Res (download) formats won't end up killing each other like DVDA and SACD did...

I still don't think that this is the full answer. With 24 bit, alot of machines and programs claim it, but only a handful can actually output in this resolution. Sure thay can read it, but some do a poor job at that also. For the ones that can actually output in 24b, not all of those do a great job. It's hardly the common mans tool for music enjoyment.

To fully realise the benefits of high resolution digital, money must be spent. Not much different than analog at this point.

[Feanor]

Lack of current music? C'mon. As a hip/hop and reggae lover this is a surprising statement. Those two genres lead the way in vinyl releases. Anyhow, I bet some of the biggest gains in this hobby have been made in analog over the last 15 - 20 years. Cartridges alone are reason enough to reconsider...

I;m gonna get me some new shoes now...

But lack of music is one issue I have with vinyl.

I listen to classical, (granted not everyone's main choice), but today the is ZERO classical music released on vinyl -- on the other hand quite a lot on SACD.

If I'd been more heavilty into acquiring music in the late '80's and most of the '90s I might have acquired a lot of good classical on used vinyl but I missed out on the big sell-off. Today there are very few bargains available for classical on vinyl.

Meanwhile classical on CD doesn't suffer the compression problems that afflict rock and other popular genres. And of course I'm not, nor ever was, one of those masochist who enjoy the rituals of the care and playing of vinyl. In fact today virtual all my listening is to computer files.

[Feanor]

I still don't think that this is the full answer. With 24 bit, alot of machines and programs claim it, but only a handful can actually output in this resolution. Sure thay can read it, but some do a poor job at that also. For the ones that can actually output in 24b, not all of those do a great job. It's hardly the common mans tool for music enjoyment.

To fully realise the benefits of high resolution digital, money must be spent. Not much different than analog at this point.

Hahaha!! There's the big advantage I have: I'm deaf above 10kHz so hi rez per se doesn't help me. True the average SACD sounds better than the average CD but -- at least for me -- the advantage comes not from the higher bit rate, but from the greater, and more audiophile oriented, care taken with the mastering.

In any case, 90+% of the sound quality of recordings comes from the recording and mastering, not from the distribution medium. In fact the big promise is from MC but that has yet to be realized in terms of quantity of music presently available.

[poppachubby]

But lack of music is one issue I have with vinyl.

It actually surprises me that there is no attempt to produce "audiophile" vinyl for classical. Of course, it would be ridiculously expensive. In fact alot of the high quality, new releases are stupid expensive.

I have to admit, I am becoming more and more curious about SACD. I know I am a little late, but I am presently quite satisfied with my digital set up. I would like to see how much farther I can go. The problem is, I am simply unwilling to spend the money on the discs.

I think where I will realistically end up is with a Marantz CD48/85/95 or Philips CD960/650. There is a great tube pro in town who has confirmed that he can modify it with a tube circuit. I have provided him with the working schematic.

[poppachubby]

In any case, 90+% of the sound quality of recordings comes from the recording and mastering, not from the distribution medium.

Yes, but what are you saying? My point is that you must have a machine that is capable of processing AND outputting ALL of the information. As i already mentioned, I think alot of people are mislead into thinking that because their unit can read 24 bit, it can also output it.

[Ajani]

Yes, but what are you saying? My point is that you must have a machine that is capable of processing AND outputting ALL of the information. As i already mentioned, I think alot of people are mislead into thinking that because their unit can read 24 bit, it can also output it.

Get a Squeezebox Touch for $300... Problem solved very cheaply...

[Ajani]

I still don't think that this is the full answer. With 24 bit, alot of machines and programs claim it, but only a handful can actually output in this resolution. Sure thay can read it, but some do a poor job at that also. For the ones that can actually output in 24b, not all of those do a great job. It's hardly the common mans tool for music enjoyment.

To fully realise the benefits of high resolution digital, money must be spent. Not much different than analog at this point.

To fully realise the benefits on any HiFi tech, money must be spent... However, excellent sound quality can still be derived cheaply:

A Squeezebox Touch is cheap way to get into High Res Music (and by all accounts its internal DAC is on par with many of the cheap DACs on the market)... However, if you want better sound, you purchase a higher quality DAC....

[poppachubby]

My soundcard is 24b capable. Some might say $300 is not cheap, although a good solution.

[Ajani]

But lack of music is one issue I have with vinyl.

I listen to classical, (granted not everyone's main choice), but today the is ZERO classical music released on vinyl -- on the other hand quite a lot on SACD.

If I'd been more heavilty into acquiring music in the late '80's and most of the '90s I might have acquired a lot of good classical on used vinyl but I missed out on the big sell-off. Today there are very few bargains available for classical on vinyl.

Meanwhile classical on CD doesn't suffer the compression problems that afflict rock and other popular genres. And of course I'm not, nor ever was, one of those masochist who enjoy the rituals of the care and playing of vinyl. In fact today virtual all my listening is to computer files.

It is silly that audiophiles have to split their music collection between SACD for Classical, Reel to Reel Tape/Vinyl for other genres (and still have to use CDs for everything else) OR stick with just the music available on their chosen format.... There are enough SACD players out there to justify more music being released in that format....

Anyway, I'll continue to pass on both SACD and Vinyl as I don't want multiple sources in my setup (that merely splits my financial resources into having several 'affordable products' rather than being able to have one higher quality one).... CD quality will have to do untill High Res is more ready available for music I listen to...

[poppachubby]

To fully realise the benefits on any HiFi tech, money must be spent... However, excellent sound quality can still be derived cheaply:

A Squeezebox Touch is cheap way to get into High Res Music (and by all accounts its internal DAC is on par with many of the cheap DACs on the market)... However, if you want better sound, you purchase a higher quality DAC....

This goes back to what I said, just because it can do it, doesn't mean it's giving full justice to the format either. The Squeezebox is a fine way to have improved bit rate, but it certainly needs help with its conversion. So then what? Mo money, mo bit rate...

I am quite happy with 16/44.1 which is done properly.

[E-Stat]

I do not think anyone would call 7 SC-V's, 2 TSW -IV tower subwoofer systems powered by Bryston 28BSST amps a compromised system.

What I find most illustrative about this comment is which components are not mentioned.

rw

[Ajani]

This goes back to what I said, just because it can do it, doesn't mean it's giving full justice to the format either. The Squeezebox is a fine way to have improved bit rate, but it certainly needs help with its conversion. So then what? Mo money, mo bit rate...

Sure... But the question (I'd love to test this one out) is whether a $300 Squeezebox Touch playing High Res will sound better than a $300 Turntable.... No tech will ever eliminate the need (desire) of audiophiles to spend more money for 'upgraded' performance... It's just whether one sounds better and is more convenient than the alternative....

Vinyl has a held a niche for around 2 decades or so, despite it's reported death at the hands of 'perfect sound forever' CDs... The reason (apart from tweaking, nostalgia and the general love of the Vinyl rituals) is that many persons prefer the sound quality of Vinyl to CDs... CDs became popular for convenience and are being slowly murdered by downloads and their respective players; which offer far greater convenience... Vinyl however continues to flourish (relatively speaking of course) because convenience is not why anyone uses it... Now if High Res downloads offer the convenience of lower res downloads plus sound quality better than Vinyl, then what would be the reason to consider setting up a turntable instead of a High Res system? Apart from nostalgia and the love of rituals?

Note: If you already have a $100K turntable, then I'd expect you'd probably keep it until you die (unless you were planning to upgrade it to something less cheap )... But for those of us with more modest budgets, why buy a more expensive turntable or CD player when the upgrade bug hits? Why not invest in High Res?

[Feanor]

Yes, but what are you saying? My point is that you must have a machine that is capable of processing AND outputting ALL of the information. As i already mentioned, I think alot of people are mislead into thinking that because their unit can read 24 bit, it can also output it.

PC, basically my point is that 24 bits is irrelvant, at least to me. And that MC is more significant (even if the effective bits are only 16).

I'm not disputing that lots of unit that can handle 24 bit input can't exploit it since, e.g. noice floors are too high to permit it.