If I understand it, now, we're getting into the question of what, for lack of a better term, might be called "micro-dynamics", reverb tails, etc. I think there is some legitimacy to the claim that LPs don't have the quantization distortion problems of a 16-bit digital PCM medium.
A simple way to look at undesired signals which are reproduced by an audio system is that they are categorized as either noise or distortion. Noise is present with no signal, therefore having a low correlation to the signal of interest, whereas distortion is present only with signal, thus having a high correlation to th signal of interest. LP surface noise, CD dither, tape hiss, etc. indeed have a low correlation to the signal of interest, and therefore some may find them easier to ignore. Quantization distortion, albeit very low level at 16-bit resolution, is strongly correlated to the signal and thus some may find it more difficult to ignore. LPs have their own forms of signal-induced distortion, so it's not an obvious black-white decision as to which is better. These arguments will likely be rendered pointless if and when more material becomes available in 20- or 24-bit format, which will move the quantization distortion below the point where it can be heard in all but the most extreme situations, certainly not situations where one would enjoy hearing music. The 16-bit standard is, at this point, a dinosaur from over 25 years ago when the CD standard was established; hard to believe it was really at, or maybe even a bit beyond, the cutting edge then. IMHO, Slim has been very forward thinking, in this regard. Now all we need is lots of 24-bit source material... Back to the "Turn It Up" theme: 24-bit resolution is pointless when the recording companies slam the levels against the top and don't even use the 16-bits they have. I'm not sure I can focus on the micro-dynamics while being beaten soundly about the head by the loudness-war induced distortion present on many of today's recordings, sadly including more re-masters than should be included. So I guess my wish list would be (in order): 1. Recording companies across-the-board turn down the recorded levels on new recordings. 2. Go to a format which allows 20 to 24-bit resolution. 3. Go to a higher sample rate, possibly 88.2 / 96 KHz or even 176.4 / 192 KHz, though IMHO the gains become vanishingly small after the sample rate passes 100 KHz. Apparently even Benchmark agrees with this; their DAC1 re-samples everything to 110 KHz. Unfortunately, I don't see the economic incentives which would cause the music industry to pursue any of these improvements. Even though we have the technological solutions at hand, getting the industry to implement them is probably a pipe dream. Pure analog is NOT on my list. To my way of thinking, the problems of the digital revolution will ultimately be better solved than the problems of the analog era. Mass duplication of music, by definition, is copying, and the name of the game is reducing generational loss to a minimum. With analog, there is no good solution, any way you solve the problem some finite number of generations is involved, each incurring some loss. With digital, just about all of the loss is at the ends; it doesn't matter how many generations are in the middle, as each one can be an exact, indistinguishable copy of the previous. (A good question, of course, is are they exact, but since the industry has moved from 1630 to hard-drives, I think we can fairly safely answer YES.) One final point regarding the "Turn It Up" theme: HDCD. It is an interim solution which I think can help to push us in the right direction. Because undecoded compatibility is an issue, it might do some good in lessening the mastering engineer's desire to slam the levels against the pin. Unfortunately, it's now in the hands of Microsoft, who will (and have) kept it locked up big time so they can make money from the licensing fees. -- Timothy Stockman ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Timothy Stockman's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8867 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43045 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
