Timing: CD vs Vinyl

[chebby]

In this months WHF mag there is a reader panel test of CD, DAC and Vinyl sources.

One of the conclusions is that turntables have better timing than CD players.

Quote...

"...the turntable came out on top. This came as no great suprise - timing is the turntable's traditional strength. While the CD system, and to a greater extent the DAC, struggled to deliver more demanding rhythms..."

I am suprised.

(I am not arguing against the conclusion. Just a request for more information or an explanation I can understand.)

Until I got my Naim CD5i I had never heard a CD player that I really liked as much as vinyl*.

Could this have been because of the superior 'timing' of vinyl?

Even the finest turntables have lousy measurements for speed accuracy compared to figures produced by the humblest CD players. So how can a motor, a rubber band, and heavy platter out-perform the electronically precise timing of a CD player's output, clocked to pico-second accuracy?

*I tried to like CDs. Starting in 1985 with a highly rated Denon player (sold to a colleague after a few weeks) and then again around 1992 with a good Technics machine (sold to a friend after a few months) and again in 1996 with a NAD (something-or-other) BEE player (yes, you guessed it. Eventually sold to a friend.) There was also the Arcam Solo-Mini in 2008 where I was so impressed with the built-in CD player that I went out and bought a Rega P2 to play my vinyl again.

 

[manicm]

Yes, while there could be speed variations in belt-driven turntables, I don't think this should affect the timing. Timing and speed are two distinct things. I'm not surprised some found the timing of a turntable better - after all there is no digital to analogue conversion or other gubbins to get between the stylus and record.

Just as an aside, I think Linn acknowledged the virtues of the direct-drive turntable - mostly Japanese as I remember like Technics. Rumour has it that they would find it too expensive to engineer one themselves, which I find odd.

 

[plastic penguin]

chebby:

In this months WHF mag there is a reader panel test of CD, DAC and Vinyl sources.

One of the conclusions is that turntables have better timing than CD players.

Quote...

"...the turntable came out on top. This came as no great suprise - timing is the turntable's traditional strength. While the CD system, and to a greater extent the DAC, struggled to deliver more demanding rhythms..."

I am suprised.

(I am not arguing against the conclusion. Just a request for more information or an explanation I can understand.)

Until I got my Naim CD5i I had never heard a CD player that I really liked as much as vinyl*.

Could this have been because of the superior 'timing' of vinyl?

Even the finest turntables have lousy measurements for speed accuracy compared to figures produced by the humblest CD players. So how can a motor, a rubber band, and heavy platter out-perform the electronically precise timing of a CD player's output, clocked to pico-second accuracy?

*I tried to like CDs. Starting in 1985 with a highly rated Denon player (sold to a colleague after a few weeks) and then again around 1992 with a good Technics machine (sold to a friend after a few months) and again in 1996 with a NAD (something-or-other) BEE player (yes, you guessed it. Eventually sold to a friend.) There was also the Arcam Solo-Mini in 2008 where I was so impressed with the built-in CD player that I went out and bought a Rega P2 to play my vinyl again.

All the years I've had TTs and CDPs I've yet to hear a significant difference in timing. It's probably my ears....

Anyway, all those conclusions go out the window if the amp times lousey.

 

[WinterRacer]

I also read this in the latest WHF and was puzzled. Perhaps my understanding of timing is different to WHF's, but AFAIK digital systems just do not suffer from the same mechanical problems that turntables suffer from, e.g., wow & flutter, long term speed drift, microphony(?), etc.

This is entirely counter-intuitive to me, I wonder, can anyone here shed any light on why a CD or a DAC would stuggle with more demanding rhythms and what would be measured to confirm this?

 

[Sliced Bread]

Play a record through any half decent deck and the beat just seems to bounce along in a really satisfying foot tapy way. This is really hard to find in a cd player.

I can't explain it though.

 

[gbhsi1]

Sliced Bread:
Play a record through any half decent deck and the beat just seems to bounce along in a really satisfying foot tapy way. This is really hard to find in a cd player.

I can't explain it though.
Totally agree...but can't explain it either.

 

[Sliced Bread]

gbhsi1:Totally agree...but can't explain it either.

That makes two of us

 

[SteveR750]

I found that the rhythmical portrayal from CD was as good as any TT I owned (included a LP12/Ittok/1042) but for me vinyl has a rich lush amost organic sound about it, that CD misses totally. To use an analogy from photography, a CDP is the RAW file image, vinyl is the processed image.

 

[WinterRacer]

Which do people think is the more accurate rendition? Is vinyl adding distortion that people like or is it digital that's adding something people dislike?

 

[SteveR750]

Well CD by its process means bits of the sound wave are missing. It's a bit like the concept of teleportation: you chop up the original, transport it to somewhere else, and the re-assemble back to its original form. No matter how good the process, there are always going to be assumptions in the resulting output waveform, though whether you can physically hear them is moot. Maybe there is something spiritual about analogue; by not dissecting the music then in some way some 'presence' is retained that we simply are not conciously aware of. And no, I have not been drinking!

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe it's a jitter thing

 

[Anonymous]

Following a clear out of my parents house I have un earthed a Technics deck, it is easily 25 years old. I didn't know if it would even work having spent about 15 years in a cupboard. I purchased a budget phono amp to play through my Primare i21 and it sounds bloody brilliant. All my 80s albums have been dug out and the years have evaporated away.

The point of this post? Well I have a Cyrus CD6SE which cost a fortune and this 25 year deck with original needle is honestly far more easy on the ear and puts the CD player to shame. 25 years of music technology advancements don't actually add up to that greater difference.

I am a convert to vinyl.

 

[SteveR750]

I have a theory that its related to soundstaging. My Linn blew the socks off the Cyrus in that department, and I am increasingly convinced that its this that gives us the biggest impression of 'reality', not tonal balance or current output.

 

[northernsoul]

Zedrider:
Following a clear out of my parents house I have un earthed a Technics deck, it is easily 25 years old. I didn't know if it would even work having spent about 15 years in a cupboard. I purchased a budget phono amp to play through my Primare i21 and it sounds bloody brilliant. All my 80s albums have been dug out and the years have evaporated away.

The point of this post? Well I have a Cyrus CD6SE which cost a fortune and this 25 year deck with original needle is honestly far more easy on the ear and puts the CD player to shame. 25 years of music technology advancements don't actually add up to that greater difference.

I am a convert to vinyl.

Hey Zenrider what phono stage did you buy as I'm currently in the market for a tt I purchased?

 

[Anonymous]

I got a Pro-ject Phono Box 2 from ebay. It's a budget phono pre amp for about £70, and does the job for my old deck. The only comment I have is that I had to earth it with the deck to remove the unearthed hum.This is a very common occurrence having searched the net to resolve the problem.

Regards, Zed.

 

[manicm]

Zedrider:

Following a clear out of my parents house I have un earthed a Technics deck, it is easily 25 years old. I didn't know if it would even work having spent about 15 years in a cupboard. I purchased a budget phono amp to play through my Primare i21 and it sounds bloody brilliant. All my 80s albums have been dug out and the years have evaporated away.

The point of this post? Well I have a Cyrus CD6SE which cost a fortune and this 25 year deck with original needle is honestly far more easy on the ear and puts the CD player to shame. 25 years of music technology advancements don't actually add up to that greater difference.

I am a convert to vinyl.

My dad still has Technics - probably a model just 1 or 2 years older than yours - Direct Drive, Quartz - looking at your model I would say it's similar - yes brilliant sounding.

 

[Mr Morph]

Sliced Bread:

gbhsi1:Totally agree...but can't explain it either.

That makes two of us

Almost three of us... Despite the fact that I have an all digital system, I still think many turntables beat the majority of 'digital' hollow. However, in my experience, on those rare occasions when 'digital' did sound superior, there was always a well engineered power supply built into the thing. I no longer regard this as a co-incidence!