Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile

    The Revenge of Analog: An Editorial and Review

    Over the last year or so, I frequently had these feelings and a desire to make something with my hands. I thought about getting into woodworking, even though I have less than zero skills with the craft. I didn't really understand these feelings, but they were very strong. I use the word feelings rather than the word thoughts because this was coming from inside me and I couldn't wrap my head around it. I had an innate desire for something real. It turns out, I had an analog itch that was screaming to be scratched.

     

    I put down my Canon 5d MKIII digital camera, picked up my Hasselblad fully manual analog camera and shot a few rolls of Fuji Velvia slide film. I shipped the exposed film off to be processed, scanned, and printed. The anticipation of seeing what I had created was delightful. I waited nearly two weeks for the results to arrive home. Upon receiving the prints, I had a realization. While the final images were nice, they weren't the main reason for my happiness, my new found enthusiasm for analog, and my sense of fulfillment. Nostalgia also had little to nothing to do with this feeling. It was all about being human and connecting with something real, something tangible, something analog. It was about using more of my senses and being more human, as opposed to the binary digital life I lead on most days. Smelling the film as I placed it into the camera. Hand-winding the film within the A12 camera back. Hearing the distinctive rear auxiliary shutter of the Hasselblad 503CW camera body as I depressed the metal shutter release button. And finally, seeing, touching, and smelling the finished 5x5 prints upon their delivery from the mailman. This was a physical human experience from beginning to end.

     

    In a way, analog is finite, where digital is nearly limitless. Rolls of film cost money. Processing, printing, scanning, and shipping cost money. Each roll of 6x6 medium format film has 12 shots available. The photographer must take time, be mindful, and really focus on each shot. Limitations lead to creativity and imperfections. Both are cornerstones of being human.

     

    As the founder of Computer Audiophile, why am I writing about analog and how does this relate to digital audio? I'm writing about this because I believe many CA readers have similar experiences. Many members of this community have expressed a renewed interest in playing vinyl records after getting more involved with digital audio. There is also a lot to be learned from the analog world that will enhance and make our digital lives even better in the future. In other words, the whole digital music experience has come a long way, but it also has a long way to go and has vast areas of improvement and immersion still to come. Keep in mind, this has absolutely nothing to do with objective measurements or sound quality, and everything to do with the experience. Last, I recently read a new book titled The Revenge of Analog, in which the author David Sax covers this topic brilliantly. Mr. Sax talks to Acoustic Sounds' Chad Kassem, Pro-Ject's Heinz Lichtenegger, and several people in the heart of digital, Silicon Valley, to help illustrate the who, what, when, where, and most importantly why the revenge of analog is upon us.

     

     

     

     

    The Book

     

    I was recently sent a link to a New Yorker article titled What Lady Gaga Finds Appealing In Reel-to-Reel. The article touched on some of the same things I realized when shooting with my medium format film camera. Lady Gaga's new album Joanne was recorded partially to analog tape. In the article recording engineers suggest the reasons why people record in the analog domain have much less to do with the warm sound of tape, and more to do with the spark in creativity and talent that is brought on by using tape, with all its limitations. Recording analog is much more demanding of the artists. I look at it this way, demand more from the best artists and you'll get the best product.

     

    According to David Sax, "Just as the choice of technology ultimately influences the way a record sounds, it also shapes any kind of work. By making certain things easier, and offering limitless options, software can be simultaneously liberating and paralyzing. Sometimes the least efficient option, such as paper and pen, leads to better results, or at least uniquely imperfect ones."

     

    At the end of this article I read that Mr. Sax is the author of “Save the Deli” and “The Tastemakers.” In addition, I discovered his book “The Revenge of Analog,” was published in November, 2016. I ordered the book immediately. The real paper version, not the digital version.

     

    In the book, Sax writes about the revenge of analog things such as vinyl, paper, film, and board games, and the revenge of analog ideas such as print, retail, work, school, analog in digital, and summer (camps). Part of what makes this book so credible to me, is the fact that Sax doesn't interview luddites or old guys who are stuck in the past or seeking nostalgia from their youth. He talks to people on the cutting edge of both analog and digital. As someone who sells vinyl, CDs, SACDs, PCM and DSD downloads, and is involved with remastering some of the best albums ever made, Chad Kassem was a great name to read in this book. Most of us are familiar with Chad and his work and have much respect for him. Although Chad was limited to a single quote in the book, the fact that Sax reached out to Chad suggests he did his homework and talked to the right people.

     

    "When I asked [Kassem] how he find presses, he said, "Any way you fucking can, is how you do it!'"

    - The Revenge of Analog

     

     

    Writing about why vinyl was able to come back in a big way, Sax says the infrastructure was dormant but still largely functional. Records were still in storage and turntables still existed. They just had to be brought back off the shelves. This is far different from the digital world, where in 30 years many music files will no longer exist and if they do exist on a drive of some sort, there may not be an easy way to read the files off that drive. Sax also states that digital actually helped save vinyl because of sites like eBay, Amazon, and Discogs. Without record stores, these online sites helped the vinyl resurgence gain momentum.

     

    Perhaps even more interesting are the advantages and disadvantaged of vinyl and digital and how each lead to where we are today. This is really counterintuitive. Advantages of digital such as ripped files and simple copying without generation loss, soon became its disadvantages. Without a physical CD, the supply of music exceeded demand and people were no longer willing to pay for it. As Sax says, "Suddenly, an album was no longer a desirable object worthy of consumption. All digital music listeners are equal. Acquisition is painless. taste is irrelevant. It's pointless to boast about your iTunes collection, or the quality of your playlists on a streaming service. Music became data. one more set of 1's and 0's lurking on your hard drive, invisible to see and impossible to touch. Nothing is less cool than data."

     

    You can probably guess where I'm going with this one. The disadvantages of vinyl records such as size, weight, cost, and effort, became advantages. When people pay for something they tend to value it and gain a sense of ownership with the physical object. This all translates into pride about one's collection. Even more important is the aspect of using more of one's senses when dealing with a vinyl product. The smell of vinyl, the feel and sight of the large album jacket are a far different experience from the swipe of a glass iPad screen.

     

    Wisely skirting around the issue of the importance of sound quality in all this, Sax says, "Up to now I have avoided discussing sound's role in the revenge of vinyl ... as soon as the conversation turns to a comparison of the different sonic qualities of music formats, it becomes loaded with technical arguments on compression rates, speaker frequencies, and dynamic ranges. Audiophiles can spend their lives chasing the perfect weight to balance their turntable's tone arm, and the web is filled with forums discussing whether anyone can detect the difference between a WAV file and an MP3 ..."

     

    I think Sax was absolutely correct to avoid this issue. The revenge of analog and resurgence of vinyl has very little to do with sound quality. Just like the resurgence of paper, pencils, and film has little to do with the quality of the final product.

     

     

    According to David Sax:

     

    "We don't need to listen to vinyl records today. We can listen to any song on a streaming service. It takes up no space and we can do it just about anywhere that we can get a signal. So why does vinyl matter?

     

    I think vinyl is fundamentally about the emotional connection we have to things and the way we interact with them that's different from the digital equivalent. So a record is something you can feel and you can touch. There's a sense of discovery when you find a record at a garage sale or a record store [that] comes with pride. It's almost like you've hunted it down."

     

    "Then there's the act of listening to it. Not to get all McLuhan, but it's very involved. It involves your physical senses: touch, sight, smell and obviously the sense of sound. And when you get it on, you're not skipping to tracks, you're not flipping back and forth through your email. You're there for twenty-two-and-a-half-minutes of each side.

     

    There's an attraction to that because you are engaging with the music in a more committed way."

     

    With respect to streaming music and analog, Sax says, "It's not one or the other. I live in both worlds so when I am walking or when I'm in my car, I'm listening to digital music but when I'm at home, in my living room, I'm listening to vinyl. It's these two experiences that are complementary to one another.

     

    For digital, the convenience is outweighed by the ubiquitousness of it. If it's all just there and easy and accessed through a couple of taps on the screen, there's less of a reward for a lot of people."

     

     

     

    Final Thoughts

     

    The entire book The Revenge of Analog is filled with stories, anecdotal information, and objective information covering not only the comeback of vinyl, paper, and film, but more importantly, to me, how both analog and digital can coexist and how analog can make digital even better. The entire time I was reading the book, I kept thinking to myself that all audio software developers must also read The Revenge of Analog. There is so much to be learned about improving the digital experience, that I look forward to the coming improvements. I spend so much of my life in front of a screen, whether it's an iMac, iPhone, or iPad, that I long for what I'm missing.

     

    Music is something I cherish and couldn't live without. Yet, I often wonder if my listening experience has really improved, as much as I think it has, with the advent of computer audio. I have no question that the best sound quality I've ever heard, comes from computer based systems. I'm also unequivocal that the advantages of computer audio far outweigh the disadvantages. In other words, there's no way I'm switching to an analog based system. However, this doesn't mean I am satisfied with the current digital experience. The introduction of Roon software is actually a nice step forward with respect to the whole digital experience. Many members of the CA Community have said Roon reminds them of the old album jackets because of all the information it provides and its rich interface. I agree, and believe Roon has changed the listening life of many, for the better. But, digital must get beyond the simple screen swipe and tap. How this is done, is beyond me, but I believe it's necessary. I've often wondered if selling 21st century "album jackets" would improve the digital experience. When an artist releases an album or a single, there is a simultaneous release of a physical product. This product may be similar to an album jacket, but much better because its form mustn't follow the function of holding a physical album. Maybe it's a nice magazine or book that's made available with each new music release. This would enable a hybrid experience of both analog and digital, using each one in the best light. I love the touch, sight, and smell of analog items, but I want to play digital music.

     

    The Revenge of Analog is much more than the fad I once believed it to be. I was often stuck on the red herrings of sound quality and nostalgia, to justify my point of view. It took my own deprivation of analog, immersion in a complete digital world, and my own renaissance of analog photography to understand why analog matters. Analog matters because it's real. In the future, analog will make digital, its one-time nemesis and the very thing that sought to kill it, even better. Analog ideas and the ability to interweave analog and digital is the only way forward.

     

     

    1-Pixel.png




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    I guess it's unrelated, but I miss phone calls and think texting enables us to not truly focus on emotional connections while communicating.

     

    Texting is great but as a Gen-X'r, I recall the golden days of the 1990's when I spoke with all my friends via phone.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Sigh! Some folks just dont get it. (the rest is nostalgia and emotional needs)

    Digital and analogue both have great points, they are not exclusive - just different.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The reason I claim "High Fidelity sound reproduction is superior" from vinyl is because it is demonstrably and reliably true.

    Michael Fremer

    I listen exclusively to digital at home but a few friends have optimized vinyl systems ranging from $5,000 to $20,000. I think these all analog systems sound superior to my digital system. I don't care if distortion or some other characteristic is the reason; the music just sounds more human.

     

    However, I'm just not ready to introduce a turntable/record cleaning machine and start purchasing records. Maybe someday but, for now, I get tremendous enjoyment from bits.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    And I suppose you have listened to the master tapes in support of your stance...

    You got me there. ;) LOL

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Plus you can roll a doobie on it. That's hard on an Ipod."

    You got me again! LOL

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thanks for the review, I'm very interested in reading his take on analog vs digital. And I enjoyed your opening analogy. As a photographer with three four drawer file cabinets full of negatives and transparencies (and that's after tossing away the bad shots), and a 9TB digital archive (excluding the scanned images) I understand the contrasting film/digital experiences. I still shoot large format from time to time, and the whole process of loading holders, stepping through the adjustments, processing film is still fun for me, but mostly in a nostalgic way. Ran a few rolls through my Nikon film bodies earlier in the year and found myself un-moved by the experience, and disappointed in the images themselves - I'd forgotten how little dynamic range there is with transparency film, and how much grain there is once you get much over 11x14. I've decided that I don't really understand the romance of film, and other than reminding myself how I started in photography from time to time, am pretty happy to have a fully digital workflow. I have professional photographer friends, however, whose only digital camera is their point and shoot. And even today, having at least the capture portion of a fine art photograph involve film significantly ups what you can charge for a print. A fully analog chain gets you even more. Why? Just because.

     

    Earlier this year I also re-sampled the vinyl experience. I still have my 20 linear foot record collection, since I can't bring myself to take them to the dump. I cleaned up the old Michel turntable, found I had an unopened so new cartridge/needle, wired it into my main audio system, and grabbed a handful of albums. A few hours later I carefully removed the oil from the bearing on the Michel and put it back in the closet. It didn't grab me in any way, I'm sorry to say. I didn't think the sound quality was better, or even equal to, my all digital music system. The cracks and pops from being played hundreds of times (often at parties where the people handling the albums were significantly impaired and so not terribly careful) did make me crazy, and there was no joy for me in the ritual of cleaning the albums and setting the needle down. Perhaps the Michel and amp are old and not up to par, and I'd have a revelatory experience with someone else's setup? Dunno. But it really did feel pretty equivalent to my current ambivalence about film.

     

    To each his or her own, I think. Despite feeling comfortable my mind is made up, I'm still intrigued by the discussion and debates.

    My experience as an amateur photographer and as an audiophile was similar to yours: tried both film and vinyl after a long break and wondered what could be the reason for the revivalist trend...

     

    But I must confess that I am experiencing a lot more pleasure in using old Contax manual focus lenses with a Fujifilm mirrorless than with the modern Fujinons.

     

    R

     

    R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I've been thinking about if I'd feel differently if I still had my Tandberg and Teac reel to reel players, and the 600 or so tapes I made (or traded for) of rips from brand new vinyl, or from reel to reel studio and concert mixes. The pops and cracks that developed on vinyl albums weren't an issue with R2R tape. And... depending on the speed and reel size, I had 90 minutes or more before I had to get up and intervene.

     

    Sold my library of rip tapes (many of which were 3 hour mix tapes...) 20 years ago, when both my R2R machines had given up. No way to test my current reaction to that analog reproduction method. It may be the mist of memory, but I feel like my 7.5 ips rips of albums would have held their own with my current digital system, where a CD is the source. Some of the bootleg studio mixes may even be better. But... mist of memory.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I've been thinking about if I'd feel differently if I still had my Tandberg and Teac reel to reel players, and the 600 or so tapes I made (or traded for) of rips from brand new vinyl, or from reel to reel studio and concert mixes. The pops and cracks that developed on vinyl albums weren't an issue with R2R tape. And... depending on the speed and reel size, I had 90 minutes or more before I had to get up and intervene.

     

    Sold my library of rip tapes (many of which were 3 hour mix tapes...) 20 years ago, when both my R2R machines had given up. No way to test my current reaction to that analog reproduction method. It may be the mist of memory, but I feel like my 7.5 ips rips of albums would have held their own with my current digital system, where a CD is the source. Some of the bootleg studio mixes may even be better. But... mist of memory.

     

    ....mist of memory in the analog vs digital ...fog of war

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Shelby Lynne put a nice spin on this topic IMO:

     

    "I was born in '68. Mama and Daddy had albums. I grew up listening to their vinyl. I have discovered that having a vinyl collection is so much cooler than having an iPod. Now, I have an iPod and I admit they are genius especially for travel and convenience. But they aren't really any fun. I don't call up my friends and say "Hey why don't y'all come over and bring your computers and let's have a party"? Hell no! I say bring pot, wine and vinyl. That's sexy. It's really a great excuse to get together and listen to music. Everybody takes a turn looking through the collection and it's interesting to see what each person plays. The vinyl way is just me. I think if if we all listen to more music together, it really doesn't matter how we do it. Music will save us all just like it always has. We feed our souls with it. Vinyl just creates a little more discussion for us. You get to look at the covers, the liner notes, sometimes the lyrics are included. Plus you can roll a doobie on it. That's hard on an Ipod."

     

    And now you can do it all on a tablet with Roon.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    But that's not "sexy". Nor would it be much fun as compared to passing albums around or even being forced to get up afterwards to pick up the needle. Roon is personally interactive, but not party friendly and socially interactive unless everyone has Roon on their tablets or worse, it gets put on a larger screen or something. Vinyl is just more of an experience.

    And now you can do it all on a tablet with Roon.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]30660[/ATTACH]

     

    This is how I feel about computer audio...lots of components and variables, too much fiddling around for best performance.

     

    I miss the days when I used a CD player.

     

    R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is how I feel about computer audio...lots of components and variables, too much fiddling around for best performance.

     

    I miss the days when I used a CD player.

     

    I think you missed the point of the cartoon.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think you missed the point of the cartoon.

     

    I may very well have.

     

    But I have found that the, in my case forced, move from CDs to files has opened an unpleasant and expensive can of worms.

    Much like the setup of an LP playback system...

     

    R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think I would like my computer audio system better if I could get it to work.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have CD player, computer player and vinyl player. I have far more music on my computer than CDs and vinyl combined. If i could make my own vinyl compilation and play it in my car, i would probably not need a CD or a computer player. But i live in the real world. Furthermore, there have been rare occasions when digital sounds very good with the right kind of mastering (very expensive mastering to say the least). So while i believe digital has great potential, i feel the mastering is far from its potential. I feel analog mastering is way ahead in that race.

     

    But at the end of the day i always grapple with having to support and pay for so many formats.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I make coffee every morning in this, on the stovetop. Probably my most "analog" daily experience.

     

    14655160?wid=3000&hei=3000&qlt=70&fmt=pjpeg

    +1..whatever you want, but don't even dare to touch my moka! :)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have to disagree. In the book, Sax uses objective data to describe who is purchasing all the vinyl and who is using analog items. It's not baby boomers. It's people without analog in their lives. All ages.

     

    Of course, the fact that the Hasselblad is a 2.25" X 2.25" (6cm X6cm) format and that the Velvia (still makes me think of processed cheese) has the equivalent of probably at least an order of magnitude more pixels than his digital camera has nothing to do with his satisfaction with the results! As good as today's digital cameras are, they still can't compete directly with a good large format film camera, and certainly they can't compete, quality-wise, with a 4" X 5" view camera and especially a an 8" X 10" one! No, We've a bit to go before digital can equal that level of image quality. Digital photography has its advantages, for sure, but ultimate image quality just isn't one of them....yet!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    With 3-D printers becoming more affordable, perhaps they could start including a file containing the album jacket so you could print it at home and thus have something to touch and feel. :)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Of course, the fact that the Hasselblad is a 2.25" X 2.25" (6cm X6cm) format and that the Velvia (still makes me think of processed cheese) has the equivalent of probably at least an order of magnitude more pixels than his digital camera has nothing to do with his satisfaction with the results! As good as today's digital cameras are, they still can't compete directly with a good large format film camera, and certainly they can't compete, quality-wise, with a 4" X 5" view camera and especially a an 8" X 10" one! No, We've a bit to go before digital can equal that level of image quality. Digital photography has its advantages, for sure, but ultimate image quality just isn't one of them....yet!

    Are there any large format digital cameras?

    Or were you comparing a medium format digital camera to large format analogue camera?

     

    I'm using cropped sensor cameras and the image quality at this point is much better than what I got with 35mm E100VS with Zeiss/Contax lenses, and I am generally shooting at 400-800 ISO.

     

    If I'm feeling nostalgic I can always Photoshop some vintage analogue look...

     

    R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Are there any large format digital cameras?

     

     

    That's a good question. There used to be a digital back available for both 4 X 5 and 8 X 10 view cameras. It used, if I'm not mistaken, a scanning system rather than a array, and was therefore only good for landscapes and other still-life photography. It came with it's own laptop and software (the files were raw and humongous) I have not seen any reference to the system in a number of years, so I can't say whether it's still available. Again, if memory serves, it might have been sold under the brand name "Leaf", but don't quote me.

     

     

    Or were you comparing a medium format digital camera to large format analogue camera?

     

    No, I'm comparing any digital camera (even the new Hasslebald digital medium format camera) to large format analog (film) cameras.

    I'm using cropped sensor cameras and the image quality at this point is much better than what I got with 35mm E100VS with Zeiss/Contax lenses, and I am generally shooting at 400-800 ISO.

    I suspect that depends on how much enlargement you do. I would say that for prints up to 8 X 10 and maybe 11 X 14, any good digital camera with more than 12-14 megapixels can probably do as well as most film cameras to the casual observer. But I've yet to see a digital picture from any camera that can stand up to a projected Kodachrome color slide image on a 60" screen or bigger when it comes to resolution.

    If I'm feeling nostalgic I can always Photoshop some vintage analogue look...

    R

    That you can...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I worked at Nabisco about 25 years ago when digital photography was in its infancy. We would do studio tabletop product photography on a large format camera with a digital back. The technology required three exposures, one each through a red, blue, and green color filter wheel not unlike the crude, tacky, motorized color wheels people used to use to illuminate Christmas trees in their homes.

    The camera was wired to a PC where the three images were composited in Photoshop to create the final, full-color image. It was a laborious and time-consuming process, but was clearly a harbinger of things to come.

    Now, the 13 megapixel camera in my iPhone probably produces better images in an instant.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I may very well have.

    But I have found that the, in my case forced, move from CDs to files has opened an unpleasant and expensive can of worms.

    Much like the setup of an LP playback system...

    R

     

    R,

    I think it quite possible you may have become wrapped up with a case CA Audionervosa.

    All the crazy talk and claims that go on here on the sound of everything from optical drives, hard drives, power supplies, data cables, SATA cables, USB widgets, grounding boxes that contain a scoop of Dracula's coffin dirt ;) , etc, etc, etc.

    It can get to your brain and infect it with bias that may be totally delusional.

    I'm not being confrontational or sarcastic, I'm being friendly and very serious here.

    Maybe it's time to take some steps back, break away for a while.

    Then gather round some non-audio friends to help you run a series of blind listening tests and gauge a few of these things that are causing you to experience "an unpleasant and expensive can of worms."

    It shouldn't be that way and IMHO most likely isn't. Something else is at play here causing you this audio trauma.

    Good luck,

    Sal

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    That was a heartfelt take on connecting back to analogue.

    I agree that for digital, there should be a way to have the same (browsable) background info and art as with a vinyl sleeve or booklet.

    It's true the ritual you go through with analogue feels very different from the digital one.

     

    On the other hand, for me that 'future where analogue makes digital even better' is already here, and has been for a while.

     

    I don't agree much about SQ not being important though, for me it was the sole reason to re-explore high-res digital: I remember times when I listened to vinyl at my uncle's place, discovering Jarre, Santana, Al Di Meola, John McLaughlin, listening to Lalo Schifrin, then later at home: Henri Salvador, Billy Joel, Abba, etc.

     

    There was something in the fluidity and delicate highs of analogue that went AWOL when we started to dabble in digital (of course, even more so during that dreadful time that lossy-but-supposedly-perceptually-lossless compression became a 'convenience').

     

    This doesn't mean I like the vinyl distortion, clicks, pops, crackles. There's something else in it that I like, the effortlessness, the slam - put a good funk record on a good vinyl system and next thing you know, people are dancing, the detail.

     

    The qualities are that good, that people ignore or have learned to ignore the distortion, clicks, pops and crackles.

     

    Hence, my pursuit in trying out high-res was to find out whether it can reach those positives I find in analogue, but without the annoyances.

     

    I found some initial positives in high-res PCM, but it's really when I started listening to DSD that I felt we were getting really close.

     

    DSD128 to me was fantastic. Better than vinyl or close I would say.

     

    Now Quad DSD is even better. Some people say that DSD512 is a big step beyond, one which I didn't think would be there because I thought there should be diminishing returns as some point, so I am inclined to further these explorations there.

     

    So this is where I am at nowadays, I think I successfully get digital to sound as good if not better than vinyl, and of course, that's without clicks, crackles, pops and other distortions, not to mention my source material doesn't get degraded with each play!

     

    I also have a great Technics Direct-Drive turntable (it's actually a gift to my girlfriend), and we now quite a collection of vinyls as well: they are very cheap and you can easily find the rarest of albums.

     

    Both of these sound really, really good through my DIY SET Tube Amp.

     

    This is why there is no need to get into arguments about vinyl vs digital: both can sound really good, so a purely digital-phile can ask an analogue-phile 'What are you listening for?', and vice versa. There is great benefit for both sides to this dialogue.

     

    During difficult times, I have found wood-working to be a very relaxing activity.

     

    A great audio-related project involving wood-working, metal-working, electricity and electronics is building your own Single-Ended Triode Tube Amp. I am glad I did, it performs beyond expectations, and at 8W per channel, routs my 85+W per channel SS amp completely to the probable exception of power in the bass regions for very specific material (large orchestral). Then you understand how Power ratings and THD figures are being played as a numbers-game by many manufacturers.

     

    Coupled with high-rate DSD and galvanic isolation at USB, this gives me a tremendously beautiful sound. Sometimes, I think of my departed uncles (3 of them with whom we listened to a lot of music together), and it's sad that they never had the opportunity to listen to what I hear.

     

    How satisfying it was to actually hear things about the Tube amp for myself after having read about them for a long time, but listening only to my little SS bubble.

     

    A purely wood-working great little project which is audio-related is building stands for bookshelf speakers. These must never be put in bookshelves. The stands allow the draining of cabinet resonance through mass-loading. You can also isolate from vibrations with the usual cup-and-ball arrangements and more. In this little project, you may find that bookshelves speakers with stands can sound much better than very large speakers...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Here's another class of very cool little projects involving minimal wood-working: the open-baffle speaker:

     

    3ee9560d4e1b5c3d57dbd31376f78639.jpg

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    R,

    I think it quite possible you may have become wrapped up with a case CA Audionervosa.

    All the crazy talk and claims that go on here on the sound of everything from optical drives, hard drives, power supplies, data cables, SATA cables, USB widgets, grounding boxes that contain a scoop of Dracula's coffin dirt ;) , etc, etc, etc.

    It can get to your brain and infect it with bias that may be totally delusional.

    I'm not being confrontational or sarcastic, I'm being friendly and very serious here.

    Maybe it's time to take some steps back, break away for a while.

    Then gather round some non-audio friends to help you run a series of blind listening tests and gauge a few of these things that are causing you to experience "an unpleasant and expensive can of worms."

    It shouldn't be that way and IMHO most likely isn't. Something else is at play here causing you this audio trauma.

    Good luck,

    Sal

    Don't get me wrong, I am finally enjoying the results but it took a while before I got CD quality out of my laptop (though I admit that I didn't put much money in any of the DACs)...

    I like plug'n'play stuff, tweaking and box-swapping are not my thing.

     

    R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now




×
×
  • Create New...