I was posed with a similar question a couple of weeks ago. I was trying
to compare my TT to my CD player. I managed to find some old recordings
on vinyl for which I had CD's for and started this regime of
comparisions.

And trust me there is no commonality. Couple of things I should have
known...different technologies, different media materials. Though I
must admit the sound quality from the vinyl was more dynamic but lacked
bass and the on the CD it was tighter with a bit more bass. Both
sounded good and it was a futile exercise.

My conclusions were later 'harmonised' by a good man on this
newsgroup.I hope this helps.

Cheers

Max

George M. Middius wrote:
Some WannaBorg said:

I have been engaged in a debate about the "superiority" of LP over CD
measured stats (SNR/DR/FR/THD/Speed stability)
the CD case (pun)
a better transient response
system can response to rapidly rising or falling frequencies viz transients.
transient rise time of about 7 or 8 microseconds while CD is somewhat
slower at around 23 microseconds thus LP is theoretically better at
dealing with decay and such -
I would not have thought that 16 x 10
to the minus 6 seconds would be a perceptible difference
How would one go about measuring this in any case ?

Your technojabber is probably pointless enough for the 'borgs to accept you.
However, you need to upgrade your wetware to eliminate foolish questions
such as this one:

does this make any audible difference in practice

If you want to be a 'borg and fixate on meaningless measurements, then you
must forswear all reliance on subjective criteria. You can't have it both
ways: A human being cares about sound and a 'borg cares about measurements.
If you are ready to get fully implanted and assimilated, you must be willing
to stop wondering if anything is audible.



--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.