On Tue, 05 Dec 2000, you wrote:
> Seems pretty obvious to me that if you're going to record an
> analogue phenomena (like music) then you need an analogue medium
> to record it on, otherwise you are going to lose definition.
definition .. hang on .. 'twiddle' umm well .. my Neutrik audio test set
has many functions, frequency response, distortion, intermodulation ..
doesn;t have one for 'definition' whats that then ?
> Of course, the background noise on any vinyl disk tends to override
> the more accurate aural reproduction.
?? .. and as well as poor signal to noise, a limited dynamic range and
siginificant intermodulation and distortion .. oh and the very best
record decks struggle to get better than 20db of stereo seperation ..
I can see why people like the sound of records .. the distortion adds a
nice 'warm' feeling to the music, the compression required to stop the
peaks getting carried away with themselves gives a certain 'smoothness'
.. I will entirely believe you if you tell me that you 'prefer' the sound
of vinyl .. thats fine .. but to suggest that it is 'more accurate' or
'closer to the original' is simply wrong.
Over the years I've worked on most big mixing desks from SSL, Neve,
Calrec, AMS, Amek etc .. the modern digital desks have a clarity that was
not available with their older analogue cousins. CD does nothing other
than give you access to the data stream as it comes out of the desk,
pretty much byte perfect. Of course its still possible to wreck the
data with some poor munging and bad conversions, but .. at least you have
decent data to work with in the first place.
as for minidisc .. hmmm .. nasty horrible compression thing .. you're
jpeg'ing your music .. you're throwing lumps of it away ... now there is
a argument against digital recording .. you are losing something ..
--
Robin Szemeti
The box said "requires windows 95 or better"
So I installed Linux!
