Vol. II No. 1

I just finished listening to the song by Chicago called "Old Days." This was on an FM 'oldies' station. I happen to know that these major market oldies stations play digital hard drive versions of the classic songs. If an oldies or classic rock station in your area plays LP's or 45's and has an all-analog signal path to the transmitter, you are in the very small minority.


There is a tendency to believe that a blind comparison 'listening test' ought to reveal obvious or readily apparent distinctions in the sound of a given song played in a digital version versus an all-analog version. In fact the situation is otherwise: you have failed to evaluate the nature of these differing audio systems if you believe the difference in the sound is so subtle that they should be subjected to a head-to-head comparison. In other words, you are not listening to and evaluating those aspects of the sound that make the two systems so different. Making these comparisons well and intelligently is not something any person can do immediately. It is a process of study and contemplation to estimate and to recognize the differences.

The version of "Old Days" I just heard was vastly, enormously different from the one I remember. The original, all-analog version was very much modulated - tones and volume and richness varying smoothly and heavily throughout the song, so that the ending builds to a climax that occurs like a revelation. This digital version is so lacking in that quality that it can be quite adequately described in one word: boring. [I recommend Chicago IX, PC 3390 (LP). If your version doesn't sound great, it's probably digital.]