McIntosh’s Use of Opamps

[brownbear]

I would also try comparing the two DACs again with the MEN220 out of the equation.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by FreddieFerric

No wounded feelings here Charles. I just wanted to point out a disagreement with your original statement.

I apologize to the OP that this thread has ranged so far afield. As far as MOFI is concerned, I liken it to finding out that your spouse/significant O has been cheating on you (OK, maybe a bit strong, but you get the idea). Some may forgive that transgression, but can you ever really trust them again? For me the answer is no and that's why I'm finished with MOFI.

And now it appears they are facing a couple of Class Action suits over their lies. We'll see if the results bring them to penury.

Whatever happens I do fear there will be less transparency in the vinyl remastering business rather than more and we'll have MOFI to thank for that as well.

Freddie, I really do appreciate your forgiveness. I did exactly what I try never to do on AA. In addition, I was wrong. I have no doubt that the quality of the vinyl is greatly superior to the vinyl of my day. The gold standard is the master tape and I believe a superb vinyl record creates a better sound than the best digital, even if the vinyl has a digital step.

I just don't have patience for vinyl. I believe tremendous strides have been made regarding making digital sound very very good, but if you desire the ultimate, it's high quality vinyl, IMO.

Best

Charles

[FreddieFerric]

Originally Posted by Charles

Freddie, I really do appreciate your forgiveness. I did exactly what I try never to do on AA. In addition, I was wrong. I have no doubt that the quality of the vinyl is greatly superior to the vinyl of my day. The gold standard is the master tape and I believe a superb vinyl record creates a better sound than the best digital, even if the vinyl has a digital step.

I just don't have patience for vinyl. I believe tremendous strides have been made regarding making digital sound very very good, but if you desire the ultimate, it's high quality vinyl, IMO.

Best

Charles

No problem at all my friend. FWIW, whenever possible I prefer to buy my music in the format in which it was originally recorded. If it's an all analog original, I tend to skip buying a vinyl remaster if I know there's a digital step in the mastering process. OTOH, if the original recording is digital I will gladly buy it on CD or SACD. I don't see the point of buying a vinylized digital recording. That's the reason I skipped the Beatles on vinyl release amongst many others.

I don't stream or subscribe to any of the streaming services, although I do have a PC based server and 2 SACD players that I use nearly everyday.

As for the OP's original question, there have been a lot of good suggestions and I hope he's followed them. Whatever happens, I would let my own ears be the judge. He's the only one that has to be happy with what he's hearing.

[PeterMusic]

Originally Posted by FreddieFerric

No problem at all my friend. FWIW, whenever possible I prefer to buy my music in the format in which it was originally recorded. If it's an all analog original, I tend to skip buying a vinyl remaster if I know there's a digital step in the mastering process. OTOH, if the original recording is digital I will gladly buy it on CD or SACD. I don't see the point of buying a vinylized digital recording. That's the reason I skipped the Beatles on vinyl release amongst many others.

Now that we have Doug busy surreptitiously unplugging his MEN220 without being found by his wife...

Please help a vinyl newbie understand (after 10+ years of digital only, I am demoing a Clearaudio turntable this weekend, and it sounds awesome!)...

I understand the general point about defaulting to the original recording format, but you seem to say that if there is any digital step in the chain, then you are of the vinyl bus. Wasn't all The Beatles catalog recorded in analog? Aren't there certain MoFi albums with a previously undisclosed digital step that are generally considered to sound better than CD? Listening to Aja on vinyl now--I would guess it has a digital step or two, but I'm quite sure the vinyl has a more natural, organic sound than CD.

Thanks

[FreddieFerric]

Originally Posted by PeterMusic

Now that we have Doug busy surreptitiously unplugging his MEN220 without being found by his wife...

Please help a vinyl newbie understand (after 10+ years of digital only, I am demoing a Clearaudio turntable this weekend, and it sounds awesome!)...

I understand the general point about defaulting to the original recording format, but you seem to say that if there is any digital step in the chain, then you are of the vinyl bus. Wasn't all The Beatles catalog recorded in analog? Aren't there certain MoFi albums with a previously undisclosed digital step that are generally considered to sound better than CD? Listening to Aja on vinyl now--I would guess it has a digital step or two, but I'm quite sure the vinyl has a more natural, organic sound than CD.

Thanks

A great question Peter - and a tough one. The primary issue is provenance. Vinyl buyers don't always know what that is because the labels don't/won't disclose it. In some cases they do. That is the vinyl I tend to focus on.

In the case of the Beatles remaster, it was done and released first as a CD box set. The original tapes where first converted to 24/96 digital files and the CD's where made from this master. Later, when the studio released the vinyl box set, the original master tapes where not used since they already had the 24/96 master. The vinyl records were cut from these digital files. (This is the information that I remember when this all first came out several years ago) It doesn't represent a problem for me because I knew in advance the provenance of the vinyl box set. I have the CD box set and its good enough for me.

The good news is there is simply a gazillion excellent quality used vinyl records out there. Mobile Fidelity for instance started remastering records back in 1978 and they have a prodigious catalog of some great music that is all analog and can be found at still decent prices on websites like Discogs.

Some of the labels today like Speaker's Corner and Blue Note offer all analog remasters of mostly jazz titles, although SC has a bit more varied catalog.

The trick is you have to pay attention to what the label does or doesn't say. Lastly, if buying vinyl that has a digital step in it doesn't bother you, then you really have nothing at all to worry about. I'd say, buy that 'table and get spinning.

[PeterMusic]

Thanks, Freddie. Very helpful. I've ordered a bunch of vinyl and window-shopped a bunch of cartridges over the past few days, and one of the striking things to be is the tremendous variation in vinyl compared to digital. Reading about vinyl is like reading wine reviews. I also agree with your implication that at the price levels for vinyl, an informed purchase is essential--although I am OK with a digital step or two, I have no interest in vinyl that sounds like a CD--why bother?

On The Beatles, I did not realize you meant the recent Giles Martin remasters. I did not know the provenance, but I agree those have a very digital aesthetic--sharper and more forward than the originals. Though they are exciting, I have gone back to the softer more romantic earlier versions.

I'm enjoying Discogs and MoFi, I will check out Blue Note and Speakers Corner.

Cheers!

[cleeds]

Originally Posted by FreddieFerric

... I don't see the point of buying a vinylized digital recording ...

An LP often has wider dynamic range and higher FR than its corresponding CD.

[PeterMusic]

Originally Posted by cleeds

An LP often has wider dynamic range and higher FR than its corresponding CD.

Agreed. More broadly--I've been following up on this both online and in discussions with my son Sam who is a professional musician and masters the digital versions of his music but not the vinyl...

One of the significant differences I've noticed on modern (digital) recordings is that digital versions are often more forward with more defined vocals and bass compared to their vinyl counterparts. Sam reports that this is due to the increased use of compression. Compression does not just cut off the high end, it is used to give each instrument its own space. Thus more compressed digital mixes sound more precise and less organic than less compressed vinyl releases.

Obviously every master is different, so YMMV, but this strikes me as a reasonable explanation of why some would prefer vinyl on a digital recording

[dkorbal]

Originally Posted by PeterMusic

Compression .......... it is used to give each instrument its own space.

+1

Properly implemented compression is a great tool but unfortunately many studio engineers misuse or overuse the tool. My opinion of course.