Searching for the absolute best digital AND analog sound!

Miguel is back on the Audiophiliac! This is Part One of the interview.
Miguel's System:
Rack (top to bottom):
Audio Note Kondo Ongaku integrated amp
SME 20/3 turntable + SME V 9” arm + Dynavector XV-1s cartridge
van den Hul “The Grail” phono preamp
dCS Rossini DAC
dCS Rossini Master Clock
SolidTech Rack-Of-Silence rack
Speakers:
Avantgarde Duo Mezzo speakers
Symposium SuperPlus bases
Cables:
Power: Audio Note Kondo ACz (amp); van den Hul (phono pre); Shunyata Venom (DAC & Clock)
Interconnects: Audio Note Kondo KSL-LPz (phono pre to amp and DAC to amp)
Phono interconnect: Crystal Cable (turntable to phono pre)
Speaker cables: Audio Note Kondo KSL-SPz
Check out the AUDIOPHILIAC PATREON
/ audiophiliac
----MERCH-------
Audiophiliac T-Shirts and Mugs! teespring.com/...
Twitter: @AudiophiliacMan
Instagram and IGTV: / steve.guttenberg
#highendaudio #audiophile #hornspeakers
Looking for great sounding FREE UNCOMPRESSED or processed music? Check out these videos about the two MA Recordings samplers:
• FREE Dynamically Uncom...
• FREE Hi-Resolution, Dy...

[@antoniocruz5714]

Miguel is an awsome gentleman. Congrats for this nice chat and for this video.

[@NickP333]

Great to see Miguel back on the channel again! His system is absolutely beautiful, and it’s great to see he’s taken the turntable plunge again after 8 yrs. Glad he’s become aware of the magic of vinyl again. Thanks, guys!

[@cirenosnor5768]

Kepler Mission - Well, you know…it seems ridiculous to suggest what his listening habits are based on his profession. Not to mention you’ve never met him. For starters “All Physicists really are only interested in their own work” “Physicists aren't you know interested in recorded music but they are interested in how they appear to others” 😂 Do you know every physicist to say “all” are only interested in their own work and they aren’t interested in recorded music? wow

[@velchuck]

I listen to digital and vinyl. I stream for two reasons. Number one, when I’m lazy and two as a preview for future purchase of vinyl. I do prefer listening to vinyl.

[@ronbackal]

Oh Wow! Incredibly interesting conversation, Steve. I came because I searched on dCS Rossini DAC, and after seeing that I'm not sure - maybe I should buy a good turntable instead? P.S.: It's funny how many times in KZbin you start a video, it looks not what you searched, and you switch. I was tempted to stop the video and keep searching for info on dCS Rossini, and I'm so happy I stayed. Shows that sometimes you need patience in the digital age

[@paulpavlou9294]

Very likeable guy Miguel. Just love his equipment choices and technology obsession. Merry Christmas Steve and thanks for you great work.

[@tonynorris5027]

Don't forget that a phono cartridge is its own "generator". That is, it generates its own analog electrical waveform without outside help. In other words, the groove is transformed into an electrical signal ready to be amplified, in a span of a few mm and with no additional electronics. Beautiful design.

[@gaetancharbonneau3902]

Probably the best digital vs analog explanation I have ever heard. Thanks guys.

[@skip1835]

Love this stuff Steve - I never tire of you bringing us your viewer's systems. This vid was especially interesting to me, not just because of Miguel's killer system, but that both you and Miguel have a clear view of the digital vs analogue thing - it's not a night and day deal, it's simply not a contest, yeah, they're different and at the same time, especially at the level of equipment being discussed here, similar - - I certainly enjoy both and wouldn't want to give up either - but if it's only one or the other, over the "long haul" it's definitely vinyl.

[@mikejames-drummerreginacan1386]

I love your videos Steve....thanks !!! MERRY CHRISTMAS

[@ericdaniel323]

I had a (good-natured) chuckle when Miguel talked about the high price of records because that SME turntable/van den Hul preamp combo was probably north of $30K, and easily $40K with upgrades.

[@miguelbarrio]

@@keplermission4947 I paid NEW price, and tax.

[@matticeverhoeven6539]

@@miguelbarrio tell him Miguel! 😆 love your system mate :)

[@cirenosnor5768]

Kepler Mission - How do you know what he paid? Your general accusations and assumptions are…you know…unfounded

[@ericdaniel323]

@@cirenosnor5768 dont feed the troll

[@cirenosnor5768]

Kepler Mission - Only nobodies accuse others of…you know…being nobodies

[@labalo5]

Love the vids and the continued work Steve. Great follow up interviews.

[@briansantarcangelo8855]

As a fellow dCS Rossini owner I know Miguel from one of the dCS related forums. He's a valued member and consistently provides great advice. I share the same opinion that in many cases vinyl sounds better than even the best digital setup. As mentioned I also have a Rossini Streamer DAC with a Shunyata Omega QR-s power cable. I also have an EtherREGEN device and a Shunyata Omega ethernet cable connected to the Rossini. My point in providing this is that I've tried to take the necessary steps to make my digital setup as good as it can be. Even with my modest turntable rig consisting of a Pro-ject RPM-9 turntable with a Sumiko Blue Point Evo III cartridge, I've played various albums that I also have in 96Khz, 24-bit high-rez format. In most cases, vinyl sounds more life-like than digital. The artists on vinyl sound like they're in the room with you as the separation between instruments is better defined. I can only imagine how good some of the Blue Note albums Miguel mentions must sound on his SME-20 turntable. (Miguel, you should try a Shunyata Omega QR-s power cable for your Rossini - what an improvement. Your dCS Clock would likely also benefit from the same power cable).

[@cirenosnor5768]

Brian Santarcangelo - The things you mention liking about vinyl such as being more in the room can’t be detected in and isn’t about measurements. I think most digital fans who put down vinyl base their conclusions on measurements alone. They listen to measurements 🤷🏽‍♂️

[@robm321]

What a great system. I'm glad Miguel is getting more into vinyl. And it is fun compared to just pressing play.

[@gaborozorai3714]

Sometimes I ask myself the same questions relating to analogue sound recording and reproduction. When you consider the full process from the microphones through all the steps of cutting and pressing to the playback of the vinyl, it is an absolute miracle that the sound is not only recognizable as an imprint of the original but it gets so damn close, so real. This constant state of wonderment may be one of the factors that makes listening to analogue more involving.

[@miguelbarrio]

It's not that close unfortunately, but close enough to convey the music.

[@RichardDurishin]

A fascinating discussion about the physics of vinyl. Cool stuff Steve.

[@pedrocols]

Vinyl is very inferior.

[@kevinbirdsong5508]

Vinyl has a nice, unique, usually pleasant and nostalgic sound...but, snap, crackle and pop.

[@carljung9230]

i really enjoyed this video :)

[@CosmicKnight1]

Loved this video! Very timely to be talking about video too! From this morning’s Smithsonian Magazine Daily Newsletter, “ On this day in 1877, Thomas Edison's phonograph was announced in a Scientific American article. It was the first machine that could both record sound and then replay it.”

[@hamidrezahabibi8111]

Miguel is a very interesting guy. Nice 👍 to see him back.

[@jasoncool3815]

Why beautiful equipment,that’s my new dream set up 🙌🙌

[@glenncurry3041]

WOW! I did that! I have a USB microscope attached right by the stylus location. I look at it after every side to see if I need to clean the stylus! And most of the time absolutely! Some times extremely so!

[@donaldchisholm9931]

That is a beautiful system and it must sound fantastic! Ergonomically it must be a pain to play a lp with the turntable situated where it is. Miguel is an intelegent and interesting guy. Thanks Steve and Miguel.

[@ks4545]

Agree the location of the TT isn't great and I'd be surprised if he isn't already thinking about changing that (only a few minutes into the video so maybe that's addressed later on...)

[@miguelbarrio]

Yeah, the location is not great. But I care for the looks and not having another rack. Plus the Ongaku gets very hot so likely best to keep it at the top.

[@ks4545]

@@miguelbarrio I get it about keep the aesthetic clean and I figured the heat from the Ongaku was also an issue. I have my turntable in a similarly confined spot and vowed to change it when I accidentally scratched a record removing it after play. I haven't been able to move it yet, but I've been crazy careful ever since and will do it eventually. You have an awesome setup, I'm very envious!

[@westernartifact580]

I was thinking about this too. He is still in good enough shape to use it that way and one of the advantages is the rack/cabinet keeps most of the dust off (no need for a cover). His turntable isn’t on the level of those that come with a dust cover anyway. If his SME were on top it would need dusting twice a day in NYC. I used to keep my TT inside a large volume cabinet, without a cover on it, mainly for this reason.

[@jazzmetalaudiophile]

So awesome to see an update on Miguel. Always a pleasure to hear him talk. Happy holidays 😊

[@Ricky-cl5bu]

Brilliant loved it

[@Labor_Jones]

I've done all kinds of comparisons with many surprises. The least of which surprised me the most was how I liked different settings from different parts of my gear reveal parts of the music without losing the content of what I normally heard in the past. - I my work with PRO-LIVE Gear was Pay for the Great Stuff because the gear did most of the work sounding good. .... it's not the same when you have concerts in your home and are involved with the romance you are having with the music you are listening to..., it's much more engaging hopelessly craving to be there and had heard it as it came from those who made the sound you chase.

[@dogbiterabies2547]

i quote "i thought before" thats impossible im thankful to be alive to see hear exsperiace this day

[@CosmicKnight1]

It would be interesting to use the analog and DSD versions Miguel used and extract what was different (noise (non-musical part) or ‘sound of vinyl’ if you will), then equalize for dynamic range and overlay that on the the DSD. Finally A/B the new composite digital with the vinyl for comparison. I suspect there are some psychoacoustics going on with how we perceive sound that make analog more pleasurable, all things being equal.

[@miguelbarrio]

That has been something I have been wanting to do forever. However, I think it is pretty hard to do and would only be feasible if I had access to a cutting lathe and someone there to know how to use it.

[@user-od9iz9cv1w]

I wonder if all that post processing of the vinyl would destroy some of the low level information that makes it special. In the same way that the third copy has already lost something... For me it would not be a conclusive test.

[@miguelbarrio]

@@user-od9iz9cv1w Not sure, but definitely something I would enjoy trying out

[@syoung6126]

Steve, you look awesome after cleaning up!!!

[@johnholmes912]

It makes sense. to me, to listen to an analogue recording via an analogue medium, and a digital recording via a digital medium

[@LeonFleisherFan]

Not sure if Miguel reads these comments, but it's a misconception that the dCS Ring DAC works like the Sonoma workstation. I asked the good people at dCS this exact question. The Sonoma workstation records in 5-Bit/2.8MHz PCM which is then low-pass filtered into 1-Bit/2.8MHz DSD, whereas the dCS Ring DAC blends five bitstreams into one using what one might refer to as a random generator, in other words, the dCS is a DSD DAC. This has nothing to do with the fact that it can accept PCM at its inputs, as all data is being oversampled to the same proprietary bitstream before conversion. He seems like a great guy with a wonderful system, and since he's interested in the physics/science behind his gear, I felt I'd add this bit of information here.

[@miguelbarrio]

Interesting. I had assumed the 5bit resolution of the 5.6MHz stream was just that, but what you say seems also plausible. Do you have a reference to learn more details? Thx

[@Reyfox1]

..this is making me miss my record days. I had to downsize in my move from NYC to Poland. The weight of the records and room that was needed, well, going from a house to a small apartment means something isn't going to make it. Dang.... if I could go back in time.....

[@meshplates]

My view is the problem with digital has more to do with the often mediocre sound quality of the files than the gear playing them. This is proved when you occasionally land on a good sounding one. However, it's always a revelation switching back to LP.

[@Darrylizer1]

@@keplermission4947 A good DAC helps but OP isn't wrong. The loudness wars are well documented and a lot of recordings, modern or otherwise are not good and sound lousy no matter the source. I've got some amazingly 3D sounding vinyl that blows away the cd versions I have of the same material. The difference comes down to how the files were mastered or compressed. Most CDs sound better, some vinyl sounds better.

[@larrywe3320]

Sweet System !

[@FOH3663]

Mighty Atom !

[@Labor_Jones]

Both of you had part of the answer to WHY the OPTICAL didn't get better results. .... Steve, your description of why (to you) chased better Turntables was so good! ......... now so the clicks, pops go into the background are what are being READ by the OPTICAL means (as Miguel said) wants to read everything! So, hence the difference in sound since stuff in the groove changes from every time the records are played. Even if there are computers that could make it work better today, I can't imagine the Programming adjusting quick enough to read the garbage from the actual Cut of the Groove back then.

[@mymixture965]

Very interesting when you hear what people say who can really make a comparison. I have a very high grade turn table but my digital is cheap, I only listen to vinyl. For me vinyl is better, not always, but most of the time.

[@jn3750]

Suggestions to the gentleman: record your favorite DSD songs onto 2 track reel to reel tape. This way beats even the top sounding LPS, in my opinion

[@miguelbarrio]

Not interested in the hassle of open reel

[@jn3750]

@@miguelbarrio Did you earn a PHD in Physics at U of C? My dissertation advisor got his PhD (Econ) there, too.

[@miguelbarrio]

@@jn3750 I did! Got my PhD from UofC in 2001. Worked in high energy experimental physics, at Fermilab.

[@jn3750]

@@miguelbarrio I attended a seminar there a few years ago with Lars Peter Hansen, Robert Lucas, Gene Fama, Richard Thaler (all current UC Nobel laureates) and a few people from the math & physics departments. Wonderful place to be!

[@miguelbarrio]

@@jn3750 Yes, UofC is a great place for math & physics! Thx

[@polarbear3427]

I have a theory why vinyl sounds more organic or lively. It has to do with the random cracks that are in the high frequeny range, even way beyond the assumed maximum audible frequency. Those high cracks wake up the brain, set the brain to a mode where they are more susceptible to nuance of the music. Clean digital music, which usually plays sounds captured within the assumed audible spectrum (20-20000 Hz) and in practice usually much lower than 20Khz, makes the brain lazy, deprived of those high frequency stimuli. High res on the contrary already wakes up the brain much better. So my conclusion would be: Wake up you brain and listen to some good (or bad, it doesn'nt matter...) vinyl now and then!

[@miguelbarrio]

I agree with you. Not sure if I would characterize it as cracks, high frequency noise, or some form of mechanical dither from the process, but I agree with the concept that it is somehow useful noise and distortion that is making it sound “better” to our ears.

[@bluebussdriver]

Great video. Take a swig of eggnog every time you hear the word “right”. Tis the season.

[@miguelbarrio]

Right!

[@bigblueocean]

He's an honest audiophile: "I like the tinkering." long may your tinkler tinkle!

[@bobbyguest3906]

Do You or Miguel use a static gun on the albums before playing? Forty years ago, I had a Dual turntable ( the top end at that time) with an Ortofon moving coil cartridge and I used a static gun to remove the ticks and pops of the music, by neutralizing the static. If he does use one, why are there ticks and pops? You ROCK !!

[@Mikexception]

I like the way this man analyzes the technical aspects. Also tried to settle the balance between the same recording made in analog and digital CD. I think this differences may be defined in terms of more or less attention grabbed from listener. Not so clear to judge why because there are always some different parts of eqiupment aside of type of storage and usualy it may be corrected in some ways but lets say - always comes the moment when we neeed to decide which type of storage we want to be no1 And I always put all my effort to analog. May be because it gives more doubts and opportunites to fight them in hope for unknown. Is digital heading for some loss of quality in time - yes :). My CD suddendly in unknown moment cracked from inside and even stiin in one piece i lost playing it. While it never happened to my vinyl LPs :).

[@tobyw9573]

I would expect that clicks and pops involve a certain amount of mis-tracking or maybe "chatter" which would widen the bandwidth and amplitude of the noise. I guess my theory could be easily checked with appropriate equipment.

[@Davethreshold]

You can seek, but you will never find. To any audiophile who thinks he has it is merely fleeting.

[@MrStingraybernard]

So smart and interesting to listen to

[@snoopdoggdankkush9285]

sick AstroBoy T (:

[@sensational_cellar8606]

Love this guy and his system! Miguel, are you married?! 🙏 😆

[@miguelbarrio]

I am married. My aesthetic choices are partly driven by my husband’s - he would not put up with a janky looking setup.

[@xujznajit]

bro is on some serious juice

[@Canadian_Eh_I]

lmao are you serious hes like 160lbs

[@YagneshPota]

Hi Steve. I have seen your review of the dcs Bartok and I bought it after your review. Have you come across some of the criticisms of the dac Bartok on the Goldensound review and AudioScience reviews measurements. Would be very interested in your opinion

[@Fluterra]

I would not consider these components the ultimate in either medium. When you play a record on a real high end TT (SAT, Nagra, AF0 or AF1), it’s much better than digital, no question.

[@Labor_Jones]

I go by this when I'm asked about being an Audiophile, "Records like acoustic guitars you could build and play even if the Electricity disappeared." pause - 'The physical existence is like the FOSSILIZED capture of creatures that may have died 5 billion years ago, or yesterday?' I guess that's why, 'labels' are important?

[@oleplanthafer7034]

Comparing equallevels of digital and analog: Digital will probably only ever be able to compete with analog when they'll manage to imply a form of harmonic distortion that is able to stimulate our psychoacoustic perception as well as analog gear always had. The CD started beating records on paper fairly quickly. But only on paper. A lot of Physics and a degree of psychoacoustics vs. a lot of psychoacoustics and a degree of physics. Me, I'm analog. (and very good mono).

[@Mikexception]

I may add that my old very good memorized and loved recordings I played once in mono And now having them in stereo and switching to mono I see that both are like hardly comprable. Mono allows better concetration and readable rather variable depth while stereo is more impressive but obviously plays with directions. That is why I listen quite often to mono Am radio tape recordings with amaze

[@oleplanthafer7034]

Great! Much like me. There are certain records simply made for stereo, like Pink Floyd. But honestly, staying with the classics, I honestly believe that, say, Deep Purple or even Led Zep never really needed stereo to express themselves. I'd compare those soundwise to Cream, where mono and stereo mixes of the original albums are available in equal quality from the same original masters (the Deluxe-Editions on CD countain both). Mono wins every time for me, to the extent where I dare suggest that maybe 95% of all music recorded to this day never needed stereo in the first place - just a well managed mono-system to really bring out what the music is really all about... Just my 2 cents... ;-)

[@francisdelacruz6439]

Yes, this is a definition of a killer audiophile system. Avantgarde horns! DCS! Should sound glorious with unlimited dynamics. Cheers, Happy Listening and Happy Holidays 😃

[@RealHIFIHelp]

Nice

[@andrewdorow4431]

In my humble, unscientific description. LPs are a reproduction. Digital formats are a recording.

[@teckertime]

Exactly!

[@neilgaydon5430]

I have a high end system and have a rough rule of thumb - music recorded/mastered in analogue sounds better listened back in analogue ie vinyl, and music recorded/mastered digitally sounds best played back in digital ie a DAC/streamer. It baffles me why people buy modern records that were originally analogue have been put onto vinyl from remastered digital tape and now have the worst of both worlds - noisy records from a digital copy. You need to find the vinyl that is pure analogue all the way through to give of its best.

[@miguelbarrio]

What you say makes sense. However, do keep in mind that most records pressed today, with known exceptions for high end cutting engineering facilities, are from digital files. The reason is that cutting a lacquer is actually a pretty elaborate process and doing it from a digital file is easier. Even in this case, in my opinion, many sound pretty good on vinyl - better than their digital versions? - probably not but I have read/heard people in the know say otherwise.

[@neilgaydon5430]

Thank you Miguel, agreed, certainly easier and cheaper but for the most part inferior to true analogue versions. Interestingly it works the other way round too. Earlier this year Abbey Road released the legendary Dire Straits Brothers in Arms album on high quality vinyl 2X45rpm half speed master. I bought a copy. As we know it was originally a digital recording recorded on a Sony 24 track. I also have an early vinyl copy from 1985 when it first launched. So I was v.interested which version would win - a new painstakingly recut half speed vinyl, an early vinyl pressing or digital? I have a $30k Linn Klimax T/T and Linn’s brand new ground breaking $50k Klimax Organik streamer (which you have to hear to believe, certainly worth trying alongside your DCS. It has a superb new preamp section so vinyl and other sources get a big jump in quality too). We made the comparison and the digital was clearly superior to either vinyl versions. There are of course exceptions that prove the rule but I use this rule of thumb to save wasting too much time and money…as I just did with Dire Straits

[@miguelbarrio]

@@neilgaydon5430 Very interesting. My understanding was Brothers in Arms was recorded to 44KHz/16bit. One of the first ones to do so in fact. To be honest, I would have expected that a remastered vinyl version would sound better as in a way it would have “rounded” the digital edge. Interesting to find out it does not. How was the digital better? More clarity and edge without being “edgy”? This is certainly a fun comparison! I have found that the BEST digital actually shows its real chops with 44/16 - Many lesser designs can play hi res fine, the challenge is the make the best out of 44/16.

[@neilgaydon5430]

@@miguelbarrio You’re quite right, it was one of the first 16bit. As you might recall it was a primary marketing weapon in making CD legit. No doubt our quality of DACs play a big part in getting digital to sound very good. I’ve learnt over the years to take a ‘simple’ view when listening and evaluating equipment. Rather then quantifying it or listening for certain detail, where easy mistakes can be made, I just listen to the whole thing for the most musical, emotional and tuneful experience….everything else is audiophile hyperbole. It’s very interesting you mention 16 bit vs hi-res as I’m on a similar expedition as to why in many cases the 16bit sounds better ie more life and soul to the music. Early conclusions seem to indicate it’s down to the actual remastering than the technology and or if the remaster is being done to suit Apple earphones and alexia streamers ie bloated bass, more up front and compressed with less apparent dynamic range despite the high resolution format suggesting otherwise. When it’s done well ie Joni Mitchell Blue album on 24bit/192kHz vs 16 bit or any of the Neil Young albums where he was personally involved I prefer the Hi-Res. Still not as good as the analogue vinyl but close. BUT many others where the original recording was all digital very often the original 16bit masters sound best. Which makes sense as very often the artist/producer was involved in the mastering process back in the day whereas today record companies appear to be re-releasing new remastered albums in HD without the artists involvement trying make a bigger more “impressive” sound at the price of what made the original so magical. For example Gorrilaz album Plastic Beach or Flaming Lips album Fight Test where the 16bit original master sounds better than the Hi Res versions. I could list a hundred more. I also seem to find Hi res 24/44 2.3 mbps and 24/192 9mbps to generally sound good but when I hear 24/96 4.6mbps is more often than not worse, even if it’s originally recorded that way - go figure. I need to do more work on it.

[@miguelbarrio]

@@neilgaydon5430 Yes on listening to the “whole sound” and yes on the remasters - oftentimes the original 44/16 sounds better!

[@glennjones6574]

Miguel is hot stuff.

[@oohtob6685]

I wonder if Miguel still uses the Cambridge audio cxc cd transport with the Rossini dac and clock. Looks like thats gone.

[@miguelbarrio]

It was in the rack for a while. I actually got the Cambridge to see if I would get deeply into CDs. I didn’t. Although physical media is great, having something that sounds basically identical in Roon (I have ripped all my CDs and continue to do so) just makes it a bit of a hurdle not worth overcoming. I scan all my liner notes into pdfs in Roon so that is part of the reason why I don’t miss the physical media as much. Vinyl is an entire new medium with very different sound so that’s the appeal of it to me.

[@xaviborrell9078]

@@miguelbarrio A friend of mine uses a Metronome Calista CD transport and he says it blows away any kind of streaming.

[@miguelbarrio]

@@xaviborrell9078 I was on/off whether the CD transport was better than streaming. Firstly it depends greatly on your streaming setup - a streamer is just like a transport. I did not find a reliable improvement that would make me want to continue using the CD transport in my setup

[@onehapaboy]

Neophyte here with a question. Miguel describing the generation of vinyl pressings and the affect on sound quality was interesting and totally makes sense. How does one tell the pressing generation when buying an album?

[@miguelbarrio]

If it is a one-step they will let you know with the price and information on the pressing. There are few cases where it is a one-step, certainly I don’t think any of the older pressings are one-step except for possibly some Mobile Fidelity. I would expect in most cases they are three-step. Also to keep in mind is that how many times the stamper is used matters - for high volume non-audiophile pressings I imagine the stampers are overused.

[@onehapaboy]

@@miguelbarrio Thanks Miguel!

[@klkdc]

do you have a link or a way to find part 2?

[@harryburnett7086]

Miguel's turntable is fantastic but look at his arms they are art also lol , btw my only real problem with vinyl to me is me as i am disabled and can't get around very well and moving to from were i sit to turntable and moving it next to me is not option/al

[@miguelbarrio]

Understood. Digital is great too!

[@joeygonzo]

How many movie theaters still use analog source ???? I'd say zero in the US

[@olaniyi570]

I think there is sometimes too much focus on the absence of surface noice. I have heard turntable with higher surface noise that to me sounded more musical than turntables with lower surface noise.

[@francisdelacruz6439]

Interesting if using master tapes and a high end tape reel player could give better performance than vinyl in this system....

[@miguelbarrio]

From what I have read, it would probably be better than vinyl, but frankly it is a hassle a bit too far for me.

[@meshplates]

Of course, but the price of master tape dubs is just insane. Even Miguel might be put off.

[@Mikexception]

Sure - LPs are made from master tapes and incorporate RIAA. But I do not think tape recording has too many hassles to use even with no-master tapes, only amateur class machines often downgrade tapes and heads performance . Using dayly one of best small reel to reels ( in my opinion) which do not damage tapes I copy some of my vinyl library to tapes at 3,5 inch speed and it doesn't matter to me if I put Lp on table or swith recorded tape - on my wide range speakers and perfectly aligned (by me) tubes and comparing by fast swithing I hear it no reacognizable. So due to stylus dirt and maneouvring with LPs I prefer tapes. Only sometime cassettes make unwanted surprises It still amazes me how easy tape can preserve the sounds - my reels have smallest speed 0,9 inch and with tolernce it may be used for some kinds of music In fact it has 7 inch at which I do not record because it provides longer winding, shorter listening and more wear with no obvious advantage in sounding. And tapes if kept in dry condition and far from magnets keep performance with no my complains

[@veritas932]

well, for sure, you will need a good disposable income to get all these gears and not to mention the space in which to house the gear. We are in the money no object territory that 1% of the population are in. It will be good to know what gear to have, given financial constraints. Personally, I prefer the convenience of streaming over the hassle of swapping records or CDs, not to mention the convenience of a playlist which combines the music from several records/CDs. I am willing to give up the organic quality of analog to get the convenience of digital.

[@oldschoolaudioenthusiast]

As a lifelong high end audio enthusiast and a classical / jazz musician when I was young, I have a theory regarding the analog vs. digital debate. All digital regardless of how good is a man-made invention that is designed to replicate the sound of music which is intrinsically an analog event. Despite common wisdom these days in our virtual world, life is analog! Plucking a guitar string is analog, mechanical effort that creates a sound, the sound of the string vibrating. Same for any musical instrument and the human voice except for electronic devices like synthesizers, electronic keyboards, etc. So if your willing to spend enough $ - the idea of dragging a rock across a groove in a vinyl record to cause it to physically vibrate prior to translation into an electronic signal more closely simulates the natural event of playing a musical instrument. All things being equal - frequency response and the ability to reproduce harmonics routinely generated by the natural instrument is theoretically unlimited in the analog domain defined only by the quality of the equipment, (stylus / cartridge / turntable / phono preamp / etc.) Not so for digital. In my system, I only play physical media, LP's and CD's. I prefer the tactile experience vs. file streaming. I love both LP's and CD's and can appreciate the pros and cons of both mediums. After almost 50 years in this hobby - the resurgence of interest in records does my heart good. I also love and respect the technology side so the relationship between it and the music it serves for our enjoyment is equally embraced.

[@oldschoolaudioenthusiast]

@@keplermission4947 Understand your comments. As it turns out, I recently replaced a truly exceptional Sony classic high end CD player built in 1998! Key components were obviously no longer available from Sony so I decided to sell it before it failed. I fully expect that the replacement I chose (which sounds quite good,) for a much lower cost will only run for about 3-5 years due to it's reduced build quality and I'll then need to replace it.

[@onepieceatatime]

The physics of the cartridge moving add to the sound of "analog" in a way that digital doesn't have. If you digitize the output of a turntable, it adds that quality in. So I don't think it's analog vs. digital. It's physical vs. non-physical.

[@glenncurry3041]

@@greyhound9967 An easy comparison is an original pressing of the King James Version DtoD compared to the CD that was released off of a playback of one. They did the best transfer they could, it was even a Sheffield Lab release. No comparison!

[@glenncurry3041]

@@greyhound9967 OK, first of all the vast majority of music sources are analog. Our ears are analog. To claim digital is better is absurd as it does not need to exist for us to listen to music. Digital and it's distortions ALWAYS have to be ADDED to the process. "most vinyl is pressed from digital files" Please show us data proving that since of all that the vast majority of vinyl, most was pressed before digital existed! S/N based on the highest levels recorded on vinyl like the Telarc cannon, to surface noise on quality 180 gram discs is as good if not greater than any digital format. And the bandwidth of DtoD far exceeds any digital format! and RE digital files pressed to disc? Nothing filters out the horrible digital artifacts without the output filters adding excessive distortions and phase shifts of their own, better than vinyl. It forces integration without phase shifts or other digital anomalies.

[@glenncurry3041]

@@greyhound9967 I never was a bubble gum/ top 40/ Hot 100/... fan. There are still plenty of actual artists that do not go after the Top Pop charts and produce music of actual value and do it on analog. But if you like canned formulaic Pablum, you have fun with that!

[@glenncurry3041]

@@greyhound9967 "Your implication that anything not recorded to analog is bubble gum/top40/hot100 pablum" please show my specific quote saying this... or just another red herring! And your moronic decision that because I understand the technical superiority of analog, that I don't use digital? I've sold millions in IT shipped around the world! I have a Dell PowerEdge with dual multicore XEONs, 20TB of RAID 10 SSD feeding a Cisco L3 switch with 2x10G SFP+. and multiple Ubiquiti access points. It has over 300GB of music from MP3 to high bit rate FLACK ripped off vinyl. I can change tunes faster than you can remotely access any cloud site! And stream bit rates you can't even dream of!

[@cirenosnor5768]

Greyhound - Vinyl adds distortion but it also can among other things add a bigger soundstage. Please explain

[@exodusvelo]

Miguel is a NYC audio leyend, the king of digital, and coffee.

[@robertyoung1777]

A+

[@RedSinter]

Its interesting that he seems to or his particular systems components manage to do both Digital and Analog with equal symblance two differing sound signatures with one not a compromise to the other. As in digital amps etc leaning towards cool and neutral verse Analogs warm and airy with Tube amplifiers and Pre-amps or is it hiis turntable and cartridge the defining factor in the equation.

[@cirenosnor5768]

James Johnson - He apparently isn’t using tube gear and would probably hear amongst other things a bigger soundstage with both digital abs analog

[@karafarinperesentati]

as a musician and audiophile it's pretty annoying to see someone owns almost 100,000 dollers gear to listen to music, but when it comes to the music itself, "more Than 10 box is expensive"!

[@tommcclure8727]

Including links for each product to their manufacturer would be very helpful. Purchase links for music mentioned and equipment would be even better, as well as a business opportunity for you.

[@miguelbarrio]

That is a lot of work!

[@josefbuckland]

Best it’s a very subjective word

[@mornecoetzee735]

I think it's a lot to do with personal taste. I for one can't ignore the noise of vinyl. That siren in the background alone would make that room unsuitable for listening imho.

[@miguelbarrio]

You can’t live in NYC then. Or any big city for that matter.

[@Mark-lq3sb]

@@miguelbarrio Very true. I don't think I've viewed a video from Steve without hearing car horns in the background.

[@avro66]

Think I would have put the turntable on the top shelf of the rack.

[@miguelbarrio]

Ongaku gets hot so can’t go below. Not an ideal placement indeed, but in my book better than another rack. Also consider the amount of mass in that rack - about 250 lbs! - good for vibration isolation.

[@avro66]

@@miguelbarrio I can understand why now, fantastic system and some great British manufacturers

[@groovesick]

I always use this analogy with people believing that the ultimate incarnation of digital will trump that of analog: it‘s like saying a filet reconstituted from ground meat will taste better than the steak one started with. Not possible. Digital‘s primary reason d‘etre was not to improve sound, but to boost sales. It‘s an altogether more efficient (and convenient) packaging method. Same thing with streaming (even more convenient). In both cases convenience is far more important than sound quality, regardless of what the marketing people tell you. That being said, there is great digital out there. Overall (assuming a high level of playback gear), the recording and mastering of a song will have a MUCH bigger impact on the sound quality than the medium. However, analog recording played on analog equipment will (IMHO) always trump digital playback, no question!

[@Mark-lq3sb]

Not surprised by you comment considering your user name.

[@jerrysnead2842]

Vinyl Rules and yes my DS Audio DS 003 is the best analog play back I've owned and heard

[@cirenosnor5768]

Jerry Snead - Great…but what have you heard

[@jerrysnead2842]

@@cirenosnor5768 I have in my stable Air Tight PC7, Lyra Delos AT ART9XA, Grace F9, Modwright PH9.0X phono preamp, QHW phono preamp, used to have bunch others

[@cirenosnor5768]

Jerry Snead - Thanks, now we have a reference point 👍

[@Benvos]

I really enjoy the fact a number of audiophiles on the channel are foreign born. They have some incredible systems and it tells me anyone can go to America and make it. As someone from the UK it seems this message is being heavily distorted which is a shame. Miguel’s system must be an experience to listen to, superb selection of components.

[@rewind9536]

Meh. Cone midrange can't compare to compression drivers in detail.

[@miguelbarrio]

Cone midrange?

[@rewind9536]

@@miguelbarrio Cone midrange speakers.

[@supaplex0]

Vinilo no suena mejor, sólo suena distinto, pero con sabor a vinilo, que puede ser lo que buscan algunas personas. Este sonido depende principalmente del preamplificador. Mientras que lo digital puede ser tan verídico en tu cara, que para algunos puede ser decepcionante y un DAC malo puede arruinarlo todo.

[@miguelbarrio]

Suena distinto es muy cierto. Mejor o no, podriamos discutir.

[@markfischer3626]

It's important not to conflate personal preferences with technology. There are many reasons why so many people prefer vinyl phonograph records to CDs. However when it comes to the differences in the attributes in technology between them RBCD wins hands down over vinyl in every way that matters by a country mile. This is beyond doubt. But which one sounds like live music? With today's playback technology neither of them. While I haven't heard every piece of equipment or every combination I have heard the only playback system technology and they're all the same. Same as 60 years ago. The only departure was Quadraphonic sound and it was a technological failure to a degree that most audiophiles gave up on it rather quickly. Nor does binaural recordings sound like live music. Unless and until the current concepts are scrapped there will be no improvement. The sciences of sound, acoustics and hearing need to be far better understood. The problem is considerably harder and more complex than the current technology no matter how it is expressed addresses. I'm surprised a physicist wouldn't see that immediately.

[@miguelbarrio]

Disagree. RBCD (Red Book CD for those wondering) is great. But naive measurements such as frequency response or noise floor are not nearly enough to determine sound quality. Do I enjoy CDs? Yes. Do I think everything we hear is measurable? Yes. Do I think that the measurements people rely on are sufficient? Absolutely not.

[@markfischer3626]

@@miguelbarrio I recommend you take a refresher course or if you've never taken one than take it for the first time about information theory. I took it as a senior course in electrical engineering. You should also review the nine categories of waveform distortions which are generally well known among electrical power engineers. Often literature for UPSs explain each one of them and how their products succeed or fail to solve them. CDs and phonograph records have the same function, to store and retrieve electrical signals of what are supposed to be analogs of music. (they aren't even close as are none of the others.) Musical sounds are a subset of fluid dynamics, the working fluid being air. It is not an electrical phenomenon. By studying sound fields, how they are propagated, how acoustics affects them, and how they arrive at our ears I came to be able to understand sound as a fluid dynamic field (not of pressure but of pressure gradients) sourced at one point and arriving at another. I was further able to deconstruct them as first arriving sounds and the relative changes in time of arrival, direction of arrival, loudness, an change in spectral content of each arriving reflection at a point. I was then able to build machines to reconstruct those reflections. A simplified version of my idea is in patent 4,332,979. Ignore the first three figures, they relate to another invention. Since almost everything you hear live is due to reflections you will see how badly flawed the concept of stereophonic sound is. The reflection captured by recordings and those recreated by loudspeakers have almost nothing in common with reflections heard live. Therefore stereo hi fi can't possibly work to reproduce sound heard live. I also recommend that you take a course or a refresher course in systems analysis and synthesis paying particular attention to the notion of transfer function and how it is used to describe the behavior of electrical signal processing systems using the Fourier transfer function and inverse transfer function, the transfer function of the system being in del operator notation. I'm sorry to say that when it comes to these areas of engineering understanding I have yet to meet, read or listen to anyone in this industry who isn't clueless and that includes some of the most respected gurus in it. At least try to understand sound fields and get some literature about acoustics. Leo Beranek wrote some excellent books and published some excellent papers but the way the industry of acoustic consultant engineers use an entire different approach from my own. A competitor of mine who appears to have come to the same conclusion through an entirely different round is Wave Field Synthesis. Here's a link to its basic principles. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_field_synthesis

[@miguelbarrio]

@@markfischer3626 I am a scientist, and I have two measuring devices, one on each side of my head. As a scientist, I understand that my perception might be indicating that I am not measuring everything I need to measure to characterize the sound completely. If you consider any DAC above say $1K, they will all measure the same by the standard measurements used. Yet they don’t sound the same. So something isn’t being measured.

[@markfischer3626]

@@miguelbarrio you're right, there's a lot not being measured. This is true for all types of high end consumer audio equipment and mass market low end equipment as well. Two amplifiers will measure identically on a bench test at one watt into 4 and 8 ohms but hook them up to a reactive loudspeaker with a kludge crossover network and crank up the power and they measure and sound very different from each other and from the bench test measurements. The measurements are not made under real world conditions of use. As for measuring sound they're way off the mark. The measurements must have been devised by electrical engineers. If I ever met another electrical engineer who knew what a vector is I think I'd keel over in shock. The measurement methodology is largely a legacy of nearly 100 years ago when performance was so poor and so variable they could identify gross differences. Human hearing is not very reliable and comparisons are based on memory. Many times manufacturers and salesmen will deliberately rig comparisons. Finally not only is it impossible given available data to predict what a given sound system will sound like but there are no engineered facilities built into these systems to compensate for variables of the acoustics of the listening room or differences in the way recordings are made. This results in endless trial and error where audiophiles are constantly looking for a magic bullet. It's always promised but never delivered. Ask Steve Guttenberg to tell you his story about the DCM Time Window speakers or look it up. It is so typical. I jumped off that merry-go-round in 1974. This problem of duplicating sound can be understood with mathematical precision but I'm not giving away my intellectual property. The reason I patented this one simplified variant was that I was sure others would see it in 5 years, 10 tops. But nearly 50 years later they still design and build endless variants of the same systems they sold in 1958.

[@Mark-lq3sb]

@@miguelbarrio Well stated sir.

[@stuartblum2389]

“… right.”

[@orronoco524]

“Vinyl is better, because of the depth” Yes indeed. I also have a chance many times listening to a system that have the depth and layering especialy the mid range which superior, but “peoples” doesn’t appriciate that much compares to sparkling detail and extremely large soundstage 🙄

[@cirenosnor5768]

orronoco - Think many will say that one of the advantages of vinyl is also a bigger soundstage. Seems to me the only advantages of digital is a lower noise floor and better frequency response top to bottom. However there’s other aspects to music reproduction that aren’t measurable. If a ride cymbal sounds less strident and more natural to my ear, there’s no measurement for that…or soundstage characteristics either

[@snoopdoggdankkush9285]

11:49 what's doesn't he expect to sound great?

[@miguelbarrio]

Ok, so this is a long answer… A cutting head creates a groove. When you play that groove back with a physical stylus, more or less regardless of the cutting head shape, the stylus is able to trace the groove. For example, given that the vertical angle of the groove is fixed by the profile of the cutting head, a stylus will contact the groove at some point - and it doesn’t matter where, but will be able to follow the groove. An optical image of the groove will have a harder time to follow the groove, especially the vertical (L-R) motion of the groove. If a groove only moved laterally like it does in a mono record, then I would think that would be easier to properly decode optically. Aside from this, you can imagine that a physical stylus is able to push things aside, like light dust, whereas an optical readout might have more problems distinguishing dust from groove.

[@manelalfonso9483]

@Miguel Barrio You said you comparted DSD (ripped SACD) ... That is not a valid comparison. Ripped SACDs (ps3 or the like) sound crap, something in the proces ruins the sound. Rip the red book layer of the same SACD and you will see what I mean. Red book will sound way better. Downloaded original DSD files even better, of course. But SACD rip is a no go. Why do people keep ripping SACDs?, I guess by "concept" sure not by ear. Just give ir a try: DSD original download v. Red book rip v. SACD rip and tell me what you hear. ... and be prepared to delete all SACD rips you have in your storage medium ;)

[@miguelbarrio]

That is not my experience AT ALL. DSD rips sound amazing and basically indistinguishable from playing the SACD directly (which I have done).

[@manelalfonso9483]

@@miguelbarrio Hi Miguel, are we talking about PS3 rip (with de basic Sony chipset), or are you using some other method?

[@miguelbarrio]

@@manelalfonso9483 This is a specific firmware of PS3 (which I bought specifically for this purpose), using a special piece of software that decodes the SACD and saves it to an ISO file. Then that ISO is loaded into an app (iso2dsd) and produces DSD files which I then need to add tags to (album art, etc). This is an old method, I bought my PS3 with v3.55 firmware back in 2014 and it’s worked perfectly so far. Those DSD files can be played on players that support them, just like you would play DSD downloads.

[@smil3493]

Very nice video. I have one question though : How can we compare the same recording on two types of support, in this case vinyl and dsd/super audio cd when the chains of reproduction meaning the source the dac and the phono stage are just different electronics?

[@miguelbarrio]

Yes, everything is different. But it is still interesting to me to compare the two when the source is as close to the same as possible.

[@smil3493]

@@miguelbarrio of course. I understand the curiosity. What would our hobby be without curiosity? I didn't mean to criticize your effort to compare the records per se... I was just pointing out that comparing digital with analog does not make sense at all... The electronics are different. Its that simple. Nice setup Miguel, congratulations for your taste in hifi and Merry Christmas! :-)

[@xaviborrell9078]

@@miguelbarrio Nest step could be trying a good sacd cd transport. A good one sounds better than streaming. Congratulations for your hifi, your taste and this amazing video.

[@xaviborrell9078]

esperando la comparación con ansiedad!!! Aqua La Diva, metronome kalista, etc

[@nicksundby]

Vinyl sounds more organic, wtf does that even mean.

[@Mark-lq3sb]

I could have given you an answer 40 years ago when I smoked weed...

[@allansh828]

I am searching for my money

[@reaality3860]

Physics is law. Everything else is opinion.

[@mondoenterprises6710]

An original blue note? You mean a record that has been around since the 50's? First pressing stuff in great condition? Wow. Not easy to find or buy $$$.

[@miguelbarrio]

I got this 1974 unopened pressing of Elly Ameling’s Schubert Lieder on Discogs ($15 IIRC). Stunning sound. From 48 yrs ago. And amplified by my GE 211 tubes that are from 1944. I find it awesome when I think about this…

[@iraeich]

@@miguelbarrio Love Elly Ameling...singing anything!

[@pedrocols]

His ears aren't better just because he can afford all that expensive gear. It is still all very subjective.

[@jazzmetalaudiophile]

I tried to plug Miguel‘s IG, instantly removed 😂. Thank you YT

[@Labor_Jones]

... sudden idea.... *there must be ROCKS that have small fractures* and if broken and with skill put back together should be a ROUND Playing surface with grooves made of that slab. THEN you could have a needle (corrected for size) *and REALLY PLAY ROCK MUSIC!* _now that's cool!_

[@techrider2088]

Vinyl>Digital

[@simonzinc-trumpetharris852]

No such thing as 'best'.