Features

it's not possible to judge from a YT video
so what is the verdict and why?
thanks boss

I almost always have the same impression in these comparisons. It's hard to use terms of warmth or realism in this kind of music but there is another artifact that is very clear to me. Digital recordings seem to compresses the soundstage. I lose spatial imagery, separation, and individualism. Oddly as well, even taking into account that I listen mostly to classical, I found myself grimacing in the digital version, because it seemed to grate on me more, but I wasn't doing that on the LP. It was only after a few repeated listens that I realized I was doing this. For whatever reason that was happening, it's a difference.

Just to make sure, this was the SACD not a CD? As far as detail, 96khz 16 bit seems to match LP's. But I have not tested sound stage as in depth bc I just use Sennheiser open headphones for most comparisons.
it kinda sounds like you recorded the SACD onto a cd from your description, maybe I am way off here.

Although I AM A VINYl addict, I liked the DSD version better.

In the Guitar solo and also I find a lack of upper midrange detail as well.
The lack of Transient info has to me always been a big letdown of the Format.

"801 Live" from what I remember. I'll have to get that out and give it a spin, haven't heard it in decades.

After a one pass listen to both copies I would go with the DSD. Why, cause it sounds full and dynamic and I like it. I don't think we can compare this to CD quality, cause it isn't. DSD work on a different sample rate 2.8843MHz and filter process. Its like comparing Film vs 4K. I love vinyl but you can't convince me that everything cut on Vinyl is amazing. Manufacture vinyl requires the utmost attention to quality control during the process. I have many crapy pressing in my collection from when vinyl was king. We don't talk much about needle wear on our turntable and how it alters the sound. Heck! my system is aging and all the electronic components are drying up.

So, this is a bit confusing or misleading...we're comparing the vinyl to the 16/44 CD that was converted from a DSD remaster, because as far as I know Warm Jets has never had a high res version available. Michael, you might want to spell this out.

That said, the CD sounds fuller with a wider soundstage. The LP sounds a bit thin in comparison. The 2004/2009 Eno reissues sound very good, but not light years better than the original CD releases.

display shows CD resolution. The sound was nice and smoothe to me. I could live with a CD copy of that. But, even with a little vinyl wear, the record perked up my ears a little more and was more involving. I think the high frequency percussion was clearer on the LP.

Could someone tell me what turntable and DAC and Transport Michael is using in this video.
Thanks

What I hear is the following
Digital does not hold my attention, upper treble fatiguing,
Involvement in music less convincing on digital replay,
percussion more forward on digital replay.

The LP sound is more detailed, non-fatiquing, while the CD sound is more 'punchy' but less detailed. I can see for some persons choose CD sound but I prefer LP sound - is more natural for me. My computer audio uses Dragonfly DAC from Audioquest and Audioengine 2+ for speakers - the difference in this comparison is very apparent

To me the most obvious difference is that the cd is louder, in a bad way. I very much preferred the sound of the lp. It was more relaxing on my ears and there was room to raise the volume for additional fullness without harshness.

Definitely a difference noticeable on the output end here.
The original file comes to me at 720p which is encoded on U-toob at 192 AAC. Playback at 192 AAC through my DAC Sternberg UR22 on Yorkville SM6.
Blind test...
Vinyl has a subtle delicate tone and texture, more pronounced highs and cleaner cymbal SSSSSSSSSS
Digital has forward vocals less depth, Cymbals are MMMMMSSSSHHHHHHH
Results of blind listening
Vinyl does sound better in this case

The digital had a higher mean volume
The analog had more dynamic range so turning the analog up to where the digital is in a mid sound level would have been a better comparison

Micheal

can you please show a pic of the lp label
Is this the one with the sun rays?

thanks

Michael

The average level on the digital was higher than the lp which had a lot more low level detail and dynamics

having the amplitudes more balanced would be good

that digital did sound nice

Can you please show a close up pic of the lp label?
Is it the sun rays one?

love me some Eno

I'm using an Ayre SACD/cd player.... and it always sounds more closed in - less dimensional than the lp version. I found the same in your example - even on my crappy MacBook Pro.

only because of the surface noise of the lp. That is the one madding thing about lips that will never go away, but with 3 turntables here at the house I get over that part of it quite often.

For me definitely the LP sounded better. I could hear electronic chatter that didn`t present itself in the digital copy. The digital copy sounded flatter... though I could live with it I much prefer theLP

how can you tell whether its mastered by emi ?
my pink rim copy has a white inner sleeve with made in great britain on but I bought this record used.
into the run aut groove ILPS 9268 A-1E / B -1E and RA (not 100% sure about those two letters/initials?) is etched
thanks for your support
jk

To me part of the difference gets lost when you transfer analog sound to YT
Still, there are clear sonic differences
The vinyl version sounding more transparent and resolved mostly on the high end and the digital sounding maybe more tonaly even but darker
I would really love to hear that lp "live" from the caliburn to have a clearer picture

to it. The LP could be more dynamic overall but its just between the highs and everything else. The cd was louder but in this case I think its bc more sections of the music where dynamic compared to the Lp.

I can here the guitarist playing solo on the vinyl.
Which means I'm more in touch with the performer. Can't say that with the CD.I tend to lose the guitarists work on the CD.I know its a guitar, but that's about all.
Maybe its just me, but after demonstrating and selling the stuff for 33 years, I'm over it.

Most CD Players like yours sound bad to me, file players like Aurender etc sound much better, could you post a file v vinyl comparison? Cheers!

during the guitar solo and it becomes clear immediately - that the vinyl version produces a much more mentally engaging reproduction.

I was listening across the room and thought the LP was very bright with those cymbals. (Assuming that's not a synth; I don't know this music.) And then I heard the missing mid bass and better balance on the CD version.

I have to add this:
My vinyl pressing of Eno's Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy) "always" sounded wonderful, was pressed beautifully and the gate fold cover was nice. Years later I picked up the DSD sourced CD and that sounded wonderful as well.

I now I'll get slaughtered on here for this statement, but in my opinion, 16 bit digital can sound wonderful when sourced and "mastered" correctly. Sadly, it's becoming rarer and rarer since the advent of the lousy IPod and the limiting, compression and damn loudness wars that have sucked all the musicality out of some great recordings. If the first 2 Brian Eno albums can sound so good on CD why don't other recordings? Another one that comes to mind is the late 80's Ryko CD Hendrix at Winterland. Digitally transferred and mixed from the original analog tapes that CD sounded amazing. So do the Stones 2003 remasters no matter what layer is being played (SACD or CD layer). But my DMM mid 80's White Album from Germany (As well as MMT). That's another story being the best one I've ever heard. Period.

The hi-hat sounds so much better on the record.

The CD comes off as too much bass, so there's a general murkiness to it. The LP is clearer with all the instrumentation more distinct. I suspect some of that has to do with a superior turntable setup and adjustment. But it's all almost a moot point when that Fripp guitar solo kicks in.

My opinion of this based on listening to it on an iPad with crappy Philips in ear headphones.It is no coincidence that the LP version can be played back at a higher volume level without harshness.Digital can sound strident and have a certain nervousness or tension about it that can cause listening fatigue.Digital can fool the inexperienced listener because it can sound impressive on first listen or when not having a point of comparison i.e. LP. When debating things like you can here a cymbal better or a drum clearer you are missing the point.The point is the musical intent of the musicians is far more apparent on vinyl.Therefore it is not wrong to describe LP as being more musical with better timing and CD as sounding mechanical. Also the vocals on the CD sound desiccated (dry) and lacking 'soul'.I haven't heard CD sound musical and captivating on many occasions except for an old naim cd3 I once owned a long time ago.

As we continue to see the same Bob Dylan and John Coltrane records begin reissued over and over and over again, we're missing out on classic albums like this NOT being reissued. What a shame.

Michael, maybe you could talk to your buddy Chad about this one? I know he would do this album justice.