ralphpnj;614681 Wrote: > Your willingness to exaggerate analog's flaws in order to trumpet the > virtues of digital are boundless. While it is true that badly recorded > analog can have all the things you mentioned, a well recorded analog > master tape is the equal of a well recorded digital master as far as > sound is concerned. Digital is far superior to analog as a storage and > editing medium but those qualities have little to do with the either > mediums ability to capture "sound". > > In addition, a fourth generation copy of cassette tape is sonically no > worse than a fourth generation lossly file (by fourth generation I mean > something like CD->mp3->CD->wma->CD->m4a(Apple)->CD->mp3 and don't think > that doesn't happen and quite often to boot). Sure the cassette (analog) > copy will have lots of hiss and sound terrible but the fourth generation > mp3 file will have equal amounts of distortion that many people will > simply refuse to hear because the file is digital and therefore > "perfect". Perfect my ass. > > So please do us a favor and cut out the hyperbole so that this > discussion can remain meaningful and useful.
Now, now, Ralph. No need to get your knickers in a knot. You'll get no argument from me that analog may sound better than digital to some people ears. It does for me in fact with some recordings. But, you'll not be able to convince me that "analog" doesn't introduce copious amounts of noise/hiss and distortions that prevent the reproduction of, especially low level details, in recordings. In such aspects, analog is, technically, far inferior to digital, enough that it is a huge reasons for some audiophiles not to consider analog true "hi-fi" in the strictest sense of the definition (ie an accurate reproduction of the signal). Heck, the simple inclusion of RIAA filtering ensures this alone .... nevermind the oodles of other distortion and noise/hiss issues inherent in analog recording/vinyl playback. Technically it is very easy to demonstrate that these limitations with noise/hiss and distortions inherent in analog recording/playback are not present in their digital counterparts. Many would therefore argue that is follows that digital has a greater resolution. Back to my point earlier. The very best signal to noise ratio that you can get from analog tape is about 70dB. Pristine vinyl a tad lower. Basic, ole redbook runs out of resolution at least 30dB below the noise floor of the best analog tape/ultimate vinyl. Where digital is fully resolving low level details in music, analog tape/vinyl is completely obliterating the signal due to tape hiss/noise. It's gone and those minute nuances in the recording are lost forever. -- Pneumonic Main: Slim Devices Transporter > Metric Halo ULN8 Modwright Sony SCD 777ES Sonic Frontiers SFL-2 Preamp Audio Research Classic 120 Mono Power amps Martin Logan CLS IIz Speakers ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pneumonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10091 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=85590 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
