Low resolution systems verses hi fi we own

[Alrainbow]

why does it seem that lousy recorded music soinds fine on a cheap or lesser system then most reading this own .
As a kid I had home made stuff I built I worked all kinds of jobs to buy things . We were very poor but I always had music and stuff around me . A ghetto blaster that had tubes lol then later transistors with sliding controls instead of knows remenr this. I wonder why this faded out ?
But my point is cheap stuff for me can be played louder on bad music , even in my truck and it has a pretty good stereo . I feel we pay a dear price for having a better hifi setup. I tube roll to help this and eq too. How do others feel about this ? How does bad analog stack up to bad digital ?
Some claim analog sounds better on some bad digital music , having heard good anolog I too agree . But there must be plenty of bad analog . Of all the music i own none of my Beatles is worthy of playing loud just a few tracks . Others please weigh in on this .

[Albert Porter]

It takes a lot of work to make a system high resolution and maintain musicality. That's exactly what I strive for. I've heard high end systems are bright, forward and soul less. Systems that play "audiophile" music but come apart when you play pop or rock.

I'm not saying my system can play horribly recorded stuff and it will sound great, but it's important the system be neutral enough, clean enough and behaved enough that when the software is marginal the system does not go off the tracks.

It's possible for bad software to be completely tolerable, decent recordings to sound pleasant and great recordings fill you with joy. It takes persistence, and tuning for balance and neutrality rather than chasing excitement that does not serve the music.

Last, in my experience this is harder to do with digital than analog and harder with solid state than tubes. That said my digital is good, not superb but good. That's saying a lot for me, I have always been an analog guy.

[JCOConnell]

My analog Beatles Lps ( mofi stereo and emi mono box sets ) sound great at any volume.

[Johnny Vinyl]

All my original The Beatles vinyl, which are all Canadian pressings, have always sounded just fine ...no matter the system I had at the time. And I'd say that holds true for most of the albums that were recorded in the analogue domain. Once digital crept in it changed. Many of those sound worse IMO on better systems.

[Metamatic]

Something wrong with the system if The beatles sounds terrible on vinyl.

Having a system that makes most music you like sound bad really means you have the wrong system. My system costs far too much, but I am happy now that I enjoy all music I play on it. I buy a lot of new music that is full digital and most of it sounds good.

[Johnny Vinyl]

Digital vinyl has come a long way and on many the divide is getting narrower.

[Alrainbow]

Best dsd I own comes from analog be it tape or vinyl
I have a few vinyl rips of the Beatles but at the time done poorly
I was going to buy the released Mono set and have a friend with a great analog set up rip it
I just never got the chance and now will nkt bother to.
Indo get the didgital is worse part and yes tubes help fix things much better but eq helps too but must be set per track lol too much work. Best song for quality is for no one
another point on the Beatles is the extra tracking done for sound effects they almost always sound bad even if the music is good quality

[JCOConnell]

the days of all analog lps are almost gone

[Alrainbow]

Now please don't get me wrong bad has many levels to it too. Maybe it's just to diverse from great to bad.
Playing no where man in flac sounds good and on the fly upsampled to dsd 512 is magical vocals explode