The value of the source

[Wasatch]

Originally Posted by Masterlu

The K03 can easily keep up with my Avid Acutus, and Dynavector cart. That's over $30k of analog w/o the phono pre.

Again, to me it says inferior.

[Wasatch]

Originally Posted by Masterlu

This is very subjective; however my Clearaudio Innovation Wood w/ Goldfinger Statement and Aesthetix Rhea Signature phono-pre on a HRS-MXR rack will give it a run for the money.

The multiple from a K01 is 5x as much.

And again inferior.

[Masterlu]

You are entitled to your own perception of what I wrote; to make it very clear "they are not inferior" simply cost more.

[Wasatch]

Originally Posted by Masterlu

Now you are putting words in my mouth; I never said or even implied that my analog rigs were inferior; they are not. Do they cost more, yes they do; they involve more equipment and better isolation. That is part of the fun, and certainly a joy to operate and listen to.

Right, you never said your analog rigs were inferior by themselves, but compared to a CD player you did, at least 3 times in this thread. Do you not see this? Again, as a dealer/audio aficionado this is not helping a newbie out trying to get into vinyl. Also, they do not have the kind of money you have, so why would they even consider getting into vinyl if they can buy a cheaper CD player or some kind of digital and know that they are still getting great/better sound compared to vinyl.

[jdandy]

Originally Posted by Wasatch

To me vinyl is more natural in sound. Again, I'm not going to say vinyl is better, it is "different". If people what to experience a difference in music sound, vinyl is one way to go. Alot of people out there associate vinyl with snaps, crackles, and pops. Well, I say to them, you probably never cleaned your LPs and/or cart, that's why. Vinyl can easily have the same black background that most CDs have. Again, I will say that Master Lu is not giving a analog/LP rig justice as a dealer or audio aficionado with the comments he is making on this thread.

John.......Nothing is cast in stone. You are 100% correct when you say vinyl is different from digital, but the original post asked about equal value analog setups versus digital setups. No one asked for hard and fast commitments to specific source preferences. You obviously are an analog aficionado. That's fantastic. There are many folks who are in your camp, but because another individual has a differing opinion does not mean it is of greater value than yours, or vice versa. Audio reproduction and it's impact on each of us is completely subjective. One man's treasure may just be another man's discards. Such is life. No one is doing any disservice to another format by expressing their personal opinion, even if it differs from your opinion. Relax and enjoy the music.

[o0OBillO0o]

Too subjective because, as stated in previous posts, the act of putting on a record versus the convienience of random access or repeat play of a digital disc player holds a subjective value for many.

Then we have the sound quality debate,which is an ongoing debate.

I think that article is 5 years to late. Today the value is held in high resolution digital downloads and digital to analog conversion.

[LordoftheRingsEE]

-- I love analog sound (TT & R2R), but it seems that year after year the price of admission keeps rising more and more. ...Quality vinyls cost up to $50 or so a pop.

And digital on the other hand become more and more affordable. ...And DSD sounds pretty good to me. ...Even PCM. ...SACDs and CDs (good quality ones) you can get for only few dollars ($5-25).

I'm talking year 2013 here, and new stuff, not the used market.

No?

[rscotth]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[Wasatch]

Originally Posted by jdandy

John.......Nothing is cast in stone. You are 100% correct when you say vinyl is different from digital, but the original post asked about equal value analog setups versus digital setups. No one asked for hard and fast commitments to specific source preferences. You obviously are an analog aficionado. That's fantastic. There are many folks who are in your camp, but because another individual has a differing opinion does not mean it is of greater value than yours, or vice versa. Audio reproduction and it's impact on each of us is completely subjective. One man's treasure may just be another man's discards. Such is life. No one is doing any disservice to another format by expressing their personal opinion, even if it differs from your opinion. Relax and enjoy the music.

That's right I use the word different. I never said vinyl is better or that CD/digital is better, someone else did, that as a dealer/audio aficionado is doing a disservice to the public. Someone is not helping people that are on the fence of getting into vinyl using the words he did. Again, people are under the impression of what LPs sounded like in the 60s, 70s, and early 80s, and wonder why anyone would want to invest money into an analog/LP rig.

[LordoftheRingsEE]

-- Money wise: It's true that to equate quality sound from a digital rig and an analog one, overall on average, it will cost you more on the analog side, I truly think.