I did a bit of research into the SACD format - and it's still a digital 
recording. But, if SACDs offer better quality than CDs, (and I agree this is 
quantitative due to a higher resolution and a wider frequency pickup), then one 
would argue that digital recordings can be better than a CD (which is also a 
digital recording).

I do hear that some people who can hear beyond 22.05KHz often could tell a 
difference simply because they are hearing higher frequencies that often don't 
carry over well with a 44.1KHz sample rate. That I can believe.

However, most digital recording equipment in the professional world uses 24-bit 
recording, which increases the sample rate to about 96KHz (which allows for a 
frequency of 48-96KHz (which is beyond most anyone's human hearing and is 
getting into the range of a bat's hearing) and pretty much equalizes any 
difference between live and digital. 

So, I can buy that some people could tell the difference between 16-bit audio 
and live - but not very many - and that probably no human in the world could 
tell the difference between live and 24-bit which is probably why it's used so 
much.

 


 Then you also have the problems of vinyl - where the cut has to be absolutely 
perfect (which seldom happens) and the vinyl will pick up microscopic 
particles, dust, and scratches almost immediately after production (which 
you'll never 100% remove). 

This is a lot like the argument for vacuum tubes in amplifiers - where the real 
reason why people really want them is out of nostalgia rather than practicality 
esp. considering that glass vacuum tubes actually add distortion rather than 
remove it.

-William

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Hrivnak <[email protected]>
To: The Horn List <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Aug 31, 2010 11:08 pm
Subject: Re: [Hornlist] survey: digital download vs CD release


On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:20 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The reason why it is indecipherable from a live recording is because it is 
generally recorded at a sample rate of 44.1Hz - which is faster than the human 
ear can respond to.

I have to disagree with this.  Why do SACDs exist?  Because they
absolutely sound better than CD.  Most SACDs are actually hybrids, so
you can quickly switch back and forth from the CD layer to the SACD
layer.  The difference is astonishing.

> I still hear people say that vinyl records sound better than CDs - when the 
truth is no one can tell them apart...

I can!!!  CDs do not have higher quality or more data than a human can
distinguish.  That is a myth.  Listening to a good quality recording
on good audio equipment back-to-back from CD to vinyl, there is no
question that the vinyl sounds much better.  If you have never heard
this difference, perhaps you have not been able to do a back-to-back
comparison on audiophile equipment.

Michael
_______________________________________________
post: [email protected]
unsubscribe or set options at 
https://pegasus.memphis.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/options/horn/valkhorn%40aol.com

 
_______________________________________________
post: [email protected]
unsubscribe or set options at 
https://pegasus.memphis.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org

Reply via email to