Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site harvard.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!sasaki
From: sasaki@harvard.ARPA (Marty Sasaki)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: Re: Spring cleaning Preamps (actually CD vs LP)
Message-ID: <142@harvard.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 24-May-85 02:00:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: harvard.142
Posted: Fri May 24 02:00:28 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 25-May-85 06:25:19 EDT
References: <141@utflis.UUCP> <301@moncol.UUCP> <494@edison.UUCP>
Reply-To: sasaki@harvard.UUCP (Marty sasaki)
Organization: Harvard Science Center
Lines: 43

One of the problems with the CD vs. LP debate is the difference in cost
of the hardware.  You can buy a top CD player for the cost of just the
turntable (no arm or cart). The difference is especially true in the low
end. The Magnavox CD player will beat the pants off of any combination
of table, arm, and cart for $300.

There is no question (in my mind, anyway) that dollar for dollar CD
players produce better sound, better imaging, better dynamics and lower
distortion, than LP players.

However, if you are willing to spend more money on the analog player,
then things become confusing. When things are set up properly a good
analog player is simply amazing. (The LP advocates are knowingly nodding
their heads and smiling at this point. The CD advocates have already hit
the 'n' key.) I listened to a small jazz group and could place the exact
position of each drum and cymbal. Of course the front end cost over
$3000 (Sota Star Saphire, Souther arm, a Kiseki (I forget which one)
cart feeding a Klyne pre-preamp). I've never heard such precise imaging
from a CD. But is this worth $2000?

Top CD players and top LP players both produce very good sound, but the
sounds are different. Who is to say which is better? At best, you are
comparing the sound that you hear through your audio system with what
you think you remember the "real" thing sounds like.

As an example, imaging at a concert may be absolutely horrible because
of the hall acoustics. You are not limited to hearing though.  Visual
cues will often give you the impression that the imaging is terrific.
If the recording engineer exagerates the left/right separation on the LP
to compensate for the hall acoustics (most (all?) LPs have exagerated
separation) but the guy doing the recording for the CD decides to be
accurate, which recording is correct? Which one is better?

There is also the question of what you are used to. If you have listened
to LP's since the beginning of time, you are probably going to like the
"LP sound" (nobody makes sushi like my mom). More to say, but I've
rambled too long already.
-- 
----------------
  Marty Sasaki				net:   sasaki@harvard.{arpa,uucp}
  Havard University Science Center	phone: 617-495-1270
  One Oxford Street
  Cambridge, MA 02138