quoted 8 lines Theres no absolute limit to the digital technology, the limits comes> > Theres no absolute limit to the digital technology, the limits comes
> > with the standard. You cannot make the sounds on your vinyl records
> > "approach perfection". It would take a new standard to do it, a very
> > expensive standard which for sure wouldn't be in the average DJ's
> > budget range.
>
> Oh, and a new digital standard won't cost big bucks? These same reasons
> you apply to analog can be applied to digital as well.
Compare the price of ADAT with any analogue eight track system with
the same specs, and you will find that the ADAT is a bargain.
Compare a any CD player with an analogue record player that can
reproduce with the same quality, the CD will cost you nothing in
comparsion. Digital is cheaper. Digital signals isn't as sensitive to
the surroundings as analogue ones, therefore digital signals can be
transferred, stored and replayed much cheaper than analogue ever will.
(Of course there are other factors as well that make digital
cheaper...)
quoted 9 lines The CD-standard will not allow sample rates above 44.1 kHz as> > The CD-standard will not allow sample rates above 44.1 kHz as
> > is. This is in my opinion quite enough unless a brand new musicmarket
> > directed to dogs appears. A human being cannot hear anything above
> > 20kHz (and that is if the hearing is intact, ie on very young babies)
> > and considering the Nyquist theorem 44.1 kHz is more than enough to
> > satisfy human needs.
>
> But there is still the possibility that the high-end affects the low end
> through interference.
Well, there's a possibility, but I don't think you would hear any
difference between a recording made at 44.1kHz/16 bits and a
recording made at 88.2 kHz/16 bits. And a crowd enjoying the talents
of a DJ through a PA for sure wouldn't.
quoted 8 lines On the other hand, the resolution of each sample is 16 bits which> > On the other hand, the resolution of each sample is 16 bits which
> > allow 65536 different levels of sound intesity to be sampled. An
> > improvement to 17 bits would give twice the amount of levels, so the
> > improvements to the CD-standard should be more bits/sample.
>
> Yeah, but consider analog has INFINITE bits... Volume levels are
> continuously variable, only limited by precision.
>
Not INFINITE. There are still limitations. Your ears are not as good
as you seem to think, neither your eyes. There isn't much use in
trying to reproduce something that you cannot sense in the first
place.
quoted 9 lines Digital technologies will always be better, easier to use and also> > Digital technologies will always be better, easier to use and also
> > have a far better sound quality to price ratio.
>
> Figure this -- both mediums are trying to get to the same audio
> "nirvana": true reproduction of sound. My reasoning for analog is that
> we live in an analog world. Things are not simply on or off, and they
> aren't even rounded to the umpteenth decimal point. You could argue that
> we could digitize on the molecular level, but even molecular positions
> are continuously variable.
Yeah, sure. But can you actually notice the difference at molecular
level? Of course things aren't just on or off, but if things are
divided into very tiny pieces, on or off is adequate (spell?).
quoted 1 line Wheee... Digital will always be virtual. Analog is physical, it is real.> Wheee... Digital will always be virtual. Analog is physical, it is real.
Virtual is real.
quoted 2 lines tfinn@crash.cts.com (Preferred)> tfinn@crash.cts.com (Preferred)
> The Finn/ VLA
-----------------------------------------------------
- Johan Burman, eldjbu@tt.luth.se -
- woom@ludd.luth.se -
- -
- woom uses akai equipment... -
-----------------------------------------------------