December 5, 2007 by A.S. Van Dorston

I thought the analog vs. digital debate ran itself into the ground over a decade ago, but apparently not. Part of the problem is people are confused by the variety of debates between compression codecs and compression during the mastering process, two different issues. The strange outcome is a return to vinyl fetishism (see Michael Fremer’s comments) that really isn’t going to address these issues, unless you want to stop listening to new music, which is mostly not available on vinyl.

First of all, the only time vinyl is audibly better than digital is when the remastering job for CD is botched or taken from faulty masters, which was fairly common in 1984-1992, when engineers were on a learning curve. I’ve been researching this issue for a decade and I have NEVER found conclusive scientific evidence via double-blind testing that proved vinyl was superior to digital when using the same master. The so-called “warmth” of the analog sound is just the way the brain perceives a sound that’s distorted in a certain way. Keep in mind that recordings have not been made directly to vinyl since the invention of magnetic tape in the 1930s. The tape, being non-linear, creates low-order harmonics that are perceived as “warm sound”. That effect is quite easily achievable through electronic means in a (yes) digital environment. There are boxes that you can buy and insert in the digital stream that will add “warmth” to the sound through means of adding low-order harmonics (e.g. distorting the sound). This distortion is obviously not true to the original music. However, it is an effect that older generations are used to and nostalgic for.

PBS’s Wired Science show addressed this issue, but it was disappointing because the science was pretty flimsy. They had engineers Colin Miller & Jean-Marie Horvat of Animal Records, and two members of the band Great Northern do one A/B listening test to just one song randomly flipped between analog and digital. The “big surprise” was that no one could consistently tell the difference. The engineers guessed which was which correctly 55% of the time (so much for their “golden ears”), the band 53%. It’s not clear whether they tried to judge which sounded better and failed, or didn’t bother to try. They also interviewed engineers Steve Albini and Ken Andrews. Albini is no dummy, and rather than get himself into trouble, he simply said analog was superior to MP3s (duh), and mentioned how digital mastering was screwed up when CDs were first introduced in the 80s. The only thing conclusive here is that host Ziya Tong is a total babe.

Then there’s the debate about sample rates. The bandwidth of CDs are 44.1 kHz sampling rate (44,100 samples) x 16 bits x 2 channels = 1.4 Megabits per second. With a sampling rate of 44.1 kHz you have an effective frequency response of up to 22.05 kHz (way above what most people will statistically be able to perceive as sound). HD-DVD/DVD-audio offers 9.6Mbps, with 128 kHz sampling rate at 24 bits. While the higher sample rates correct the distortion of high-end frequencies that occur in 1.4 Mbps CDs, those frequencies are only audible to dogs, cats and bats, who, when asked, would probably say they prefer CDs as they wouldn’t hurt their ears as much.

Additionally, the transducers on both ends of the audio chain are too limited to properly take advantage of 128 kHz, or even 96 kHz. Paul Lehrman, a composer, educator, and consulting editor for Mix magazine, points out that the frequency responses of most mics and digital musical instruments roll off at around 20 kHz. Thus, anything recorded above 20 kHz at a 96 kHz sampling rate “is probably junk,” claims Lehrman. In response to the argument that it’s the digital filter in 96 kHz systems, and not the extended frequency response, that’s responsible for the improved sonics, Lehrman says that, in A/B tests, he has “never been able to tell, definitively, the difference between a well-constructed 44.1 or 48 kHz oversampling converter and a 96 kHz converter.”

The practice of over-compression to make music sound louder is a whole different can of worms. Spreading the word on this issue will hopefully result in a very simple solution. Bands and labels that want to have an over-compressed loud mix for radio and MP3s can make an alternative mix available for purchase in lossless codecs such as Apple lossless .m4a and FLAC for people who care about good sound.

I can’t see buying turntables as a solution. Limited dynamics (vinyl’s 70dB vs. CD’s 96dB) and deteriorating sound quality issues aside, hunting for cheap vinyl can be fun. But only a small percentage of new releases are available on vinyl. There are three things, however, that can make a huge difference.

1) Improve your source. Lossless codecs are starting to become available for purchase, but at $1.50 a song, they’re a rip-off. Buy CDs instead. Rip them to Apple lossless .m4a or FLAC formats. Hard drives have nearly a 100% failure rate, so CDs are still the best available backup storage for digital data.

2) Use a better DAC (digital audio converter). The sound cards that come with most computers are crap. You can either buy a professional quality sound card, or an external DAC that can connect to your computer via USB2. Some high end headphone amps also include DACs. Yamaha, Harman/Kardon and Outlaw Audio offer receivers with USB inputs.

3) For the love of god, throw away those cheap headphones and computer speakers!This is where sound quality can be improved the most. Many people are shocked how much difference even a decent set of $200 speakers or headphones can make. Quality per value peaks at around $1,500, with diminishing returns after that. Many audiophiles will argue where the tipping point is to death. Ignore them and listen for yourself and go only as high as your budget will allow.

When most people can’t even tell the difference between MP3s and CDs on their computers or earbuds, this solution will be more than good enough. If you get sucked down the slippery slope of audiophilia and spend $20,000+ on your AV system, don’t blame me!

Posted in: Audio Gear, Rants