The article nihon94 links to is an excellent basic description of the situation (you must read all pages).  There are many factors involved with this subject.  I will add just a few, if you don't mind, and yes, I will be showing my age here.

As the article mentioned, what someone considers "good sound" is highly subjective.  It can depend on one's actual ability to hear all frequencies equally well (we are not all created the same).  It can simply be a matter of "taste", which is highly subjective.  It can also be affected by what one is accustomed to hearing and what one's expectations are.

For instance, many of you are too young to have listened to analog audio to any extent while growing up.  And if you did, the chances are very good what you heard was not ideal.  You have grown up mostly listening to only digital music in one form or another.

Neither format is "perfect" (yet). To those who know, analog audio does have a warmth and ambiance that digital audio, especially in the early days, did not.  What CD's did have was superior frequency response, dynamic range, and a lack of pops and scratches heard on most poorly cared for vinyl records.  In both cases, the results depended largely on the skill and care of the audio engineers producing the recordings.  All too often, the record companies didn't care if they produced and distributed a "quality" product, but there were/are exceptions.  I've heard excellent recordings of both formats, and I've heard many poor ones.  There are a few issues that affect those of us here who are making music and using MAGIX products (and others).

Over the last couple of decades, there has been assault on the quality of audio called, the "Loudness Wars".  Basically, it's been a ridiculous fight over who can make the loudest recordings.  Most of the commercial audio of the last decade or so and all of the "remastered" re-releases of older recordings suffer from this syndrome to some extent.  This is what most of you younger folks now know as "good sound" (in other words LOUD).  To people who know better, it isn't.  What it has done is squeeze the dynamics (and "life") right out of the music. You can read more about it here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_wars

The other issue is audio conversion and compression.  As the article described, digital music is a digital imitation (see Pulse Code Modulation) of a "smooth" analog audio source. The better (uncompressed) digital formats, like WAV, etc., are the most accurate digital representations.  The trouble begins when you convert and compress the file into other formats, like MP3, with smaller file sizes.  To do this, the converter "takes out" what it considers to be un-needed bits.  These "bits" are usually sounds that are much weaker than other sounds.  This can include reverberations and such that usually give the music a "live" feel and "presence".  This can contribute to the effect of music sounding "flat".  You can read about audio file formats here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_file_formats

Whenever talking about analog to digital (A/D) and digital to analog (D/A) conversions, the quality of the hardware/software that does the converting is very important.  If you use poor quality hardware/software, you will get less than ideal results.

I'd be very surprised if anyone were converting digital to vinyl, and then back to digital, but that's not to say it doesn't happen.  If they did, they would probably use analog tape instead of vinyl.  If anything, it would alter the sound and feel of the music slightly.

Hi

IMHO no one would convert digital to audio to digital.  Going from digital to vinyl and back involves 2 stages of drastically modifying the frequency response curves - think RIAA equalisation and the reverse.

I feel that what you have heard is part of the ongoing 'hifi buffs' war against digital. This 'war' has been going on since the introduction of the phonograph.

This started with a thorn needle sounds better than a steel needle and so on - in more modern terms ideas such as

-  Valve amps sound better than transistor - IMHO only when you overdrive them - valves distort gracefully compared to transistor amps.

- You should have the lowest THD amp possible - Why?  The end of the audio chain is the loudspeaker - it typically adds 1 - 2 % THD even for the best of them.

And of course analog sounds better then digital.

A very subjective (and emotive for some) topic which has been going on for decades and will continue for a long while yet!

The sound one person likes may not be to the taste of someone else so go with the sound you like - not what others say is best.

John

Now where did I put those thorn needles

This was a fascinating thread to read.  Makes a good point to adding a category to the forum in here...one that's called "For the Love of Music" where such questions can be asked and answered just as it was here.

This was a fascinating thread to read.  Makes a good point to adding a category to the forum in here...one that's called "For the Love of Music" where such questions can be asked and answered just as it was here. 

 I am glad there are some user they care about something.

About adding a category to the forum you should send request by clicking Contact at the bottom of this page.

Thank you

nihon94

Thanks everyone for the information... very helpful in understanding how this stuff works.

Glad I've got some good reactions