Get those amps plugged in with digital :D - Page 2

Dr. Z · 26-11-2007, 19:54

Digital is NOT better than analogue (over short distances). Providing your signal path is clean and at the correct impedances a truly analogue chain will outperform digital.

Plug in a turntable and play a fresh record with a good needle and you shall see!

To summarise:

Your CDP has a really terrible DAC / is generally crap or
Your analogue interconnects are broken or
Your amp had crap solder joints between the preamp board and the phonos on the back or
Its a placebo

Up to you to decide which

LeperousDust · 26-11-2007, 20:19

Oh, i just assumed cheap digital was better than cheap analogue? Tbh i wouldn't know the first thing about any of this, i use PC speakers out of lack of money they do me OK atm...

Nutcase · 26-11-2007, 20:47

To a certain extent it's all about conversions - each time you convert to/from digital/analogue you lose info. Lots of other things too.

As I said above, I'm running analogue most of the time

When its on a coax connection, can't really tell much difference tbh.

Dr. Z · 26-11-2007, 21:20

Yeah, pretty much. You dont actually lose anything converting to digital to analogue - quite the opposite. You get more out than you put in!

Ever wonder why they withdrew CD when it first came out?

LeperousDust · 26-11-2007, 22:56

Withdrew, i didn't even know about this?

Dr. Z · 26-11-2007, 23:58

Yeah, when the red book standard was first published all those years ago it was a 14-bit standard. Philips came up with a PHENOMINAL 14-bit DAC when Sony were struggling to make a decent sounding 8-bit DAC. Sony agreed on the 14-bit standard and let Philips go into production of the 14-bit system before withdrawing support for the standard and announcing their new (and not quite as good) 16-bit chip. Philips didn't have anywhere near the budget to argue or release a seperate standard so out came 16-bit CD

Ever wondered why CD had a sample rate of 44100Hz? Makes sense to have it around 44KHz (Nyquist limit giving you the full spectrum of audible sound plus a little bit for safety) but exactly 44100? Again down to Sony. They wanted Betamax to win the format war and so they made the CD standard able to fit exactly on the video track of a Betamax tape, allowing recording studios to put tracks digitally onto relatively cheap media to take to be mastered.

Unfortunately for Sony, you could use their own PCM encoders to put the same onto VHS tape (just about) but they did their very best to scupper the competition!

Zirax · 27-11-2007, 00:04

Interesting points there DRZ. There is a very clear and definite improvement. The source is a DAB radio going to my amp. So I presume that the Cambridge audio had a crap conversion to analogue outputs to connect to the amp. When I have time I will play with this a bit more.

William · 27-11-2007, 21:00

I got to listen to a Vivaldi record today on a Linn LP12 hooked up to a pair of Mackie HR824s.

Was ridiculously good; the whole argument is so subjective though and mainly the most important factor is how much the hi-fi buff spent in order to convince himself he was getting somthing better.

What I will say is that some of Bang & Olufsen's stuff is witchcraft, blasphemy, a slur on science and heathenism, i'm not sure how it works.

26-11-2007, 19:54	#11
Dr. Z I'm going for a scuttle... Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,021	Digital is NOT better than analogue (over short distances). Providing your signal path is clean and at the correct impedances a truly analogue chain will outperform digital. Plug in a turntable and play a fresh record with a good needle and you shall see! To summarise: Your CDP has a really terrible DAC / is generally crap or Your analogue interconnects are broken or Your amp had crap solder joints between the preamp board and the phonos on the back or Its a placebo Up to you to decide which __________________

26-11-2007, 20:19	#12
LeperousDust Bananaman Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Liverpool/Edinburgh Posts: 4,817	Oh, i just assumed cheap digital was better than cheap analogue? Tbh i wouldn't know the first thing about any of this, i use PC speakers out of lack of money they do me OK atm... __________________

26-11-2007, 21:20	#14
Dr. Z I'm going for a scuttle... Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,021	Yeah, pretty much. You dont actually lose anything converting to digital to analogue - quite the opposite. You get more out than you put in! Ever wonder why they withdrew CD when it first came out? __________________

26-11-2007, 22:56	#15
LeperousDust Bananaman Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Liverpool/Edinburgh Posts: 4,817	Withdrew, i didn't even know about this? __________________

26-11-2007, 23:58	#16
Dr. Z I'm going for a scuttle... Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,021	Yeah, when the red book standard was first published all those years ago it was a 14-bit standard. Philips came up with a PHENOMINAL 14-bit DAC when Sony were struggling to make a decent sounding 8-bit DAC. Sony agreed on the 14-bit standard and let Philips go into production of the 14-bit system before withdrawing support for the standard and announcing their new (and not quite as good) 16-bit chip. Philips didn't have anywhere near the budget to argue or release a seperate standard so out came 16-bit CD Ever wondered why CD had a sample rate of 44100Hz? Makes sense to have it around 44KHz (Nyquist limit giving you the full spectrum of audible sound plus a little bit for safety) but exactly 44100? Again down to Sony. They wanted Betamax to win the format war and so they made the CD standard able to fit exactly on the video track of a Betamax tape, allowing recording studios to put tracks digitally onto relatively cheap media to take to be mastered. Unfortunately for Sony, you could use their own PCM encoders to put the same onto VHS tape (just about) but they did their very best to scupper the competition! __________________

26-11-2007, 20:47	#13
Nutcase Moonshine Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Chelmsford, innit! Posts: 3,979	To a certain extent it's all about conversions - each time you convert to/from digital/analogue you lose info. Lots of other things too. As I said above, I'm running analogue most of the time When its on a coax connection, can't really tell much difference tbh.

27-11-2007, 00:04	#17
Zirax Goes up to 11! Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,577	Interesting points there DRZ. There is a very clear and definite improvement. The source is a DAB radio going to my amp. So I presume that the Cambridge audio had a crap conversion to analogue outputs to connect to the amp. When I have time I will play with this a bit more.

27-11-2007, 21:00	#18
William Vodka Martini Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Church Broughton Posts: 533	I got to listen to a Vivaldi record today on a Linn LP12 hooked up to a pair of Mackie HR824s. Was ridiculously good; the whole argument is so subjective though and mainly the most important factor is how much the hi-fi buff spent in order to convince himself he was getting somthing better. What I will say is that some of Bang & Olufsen's stuff is witchcraft, blasphemy, a slur on science and heathenism, i'm not sure how it works. __________________ Last edited by William; 27-11-2007 at 21:14.