On Fri, 28 Apr 2000, THX 1138 wrote:
> ahem, not to stray too far off topic here, but that's just not true. Vinyl
> is better, and for one reason: sampling rates. Even without added
> compression, anything recorded digitally is inherently compressed, at 44
Try 44.1kHz for a CD, which is 44,100 as in forty four _thousand_ samples
per second. Digital audio is in no way inherently encoded at that many
samples per second. Many studio systems record at 96kHz, giving you a
much higher frequency range. DATs are 48kHz or 32kHz. Early Macs were
22kHz.
> samples per second, resulting in a square wave. The difference is slight,
You only get a square wave at the absolute maximum frequency; under that,
you get a very nice sine wave coming out. Most good audio systems have 16
bit sound - as in, at 44,100 times per second, the sound can be at one of
65,536 possible levels. Hardly a square wave :)
> but results in what musicians call a "cold" sound. A good pressing of vinyl
> should have a sampling rate far above 44 samples per second resulting in a
> "warmer" sound, I'm not sure on actual numbers, but it's up there. Check
> out any of the excellent Mobile Fidelity pressings, and compare it to a cd,
Records are not sampled at a particular frequence; a minute ago you were
talking about samplign being inherently digital, which is true. It is not
present in analog.
Analog signals have a frequency response. It's much more gradual than
digital systems. As the frequency goes up, the responsiveness gradually
goes down. With records, your turntable is critical.
> you'll hear the difference, even on a cheap stereo. It's the difference
> between a handmade Martin Guitar, and cheap Sears brand six stringer: same
> notes, different tonal characteristics. I don't have my oscilloscope handy
> so you'll just have to take my word for it ;)
Oscilloscopes don't do much when you are trying to rate perceptual audio
CODECs. You can go a long ways from the original signal in some
directiosn and not notice it; do bad stuff to the wrong part of the signal
and peopel will notice right away. Scopes are only good for rating
non-perceptual systems, which is why the only reliable way to rate MP3,
ATRAC, etc. is to LISTEN to them, and have panels of people do the same,
and rate them...
Please, do read and learn about audio theory before trying to correct
others...
gopi.
******************************************
This NewtonTalk Message brought to you by:
EVOTE.COM, the ESPN of Politics on the
Internet. Visit EVOTE.COM for all the latest
news on Campaign 2000!
Visit http://www.evote.com today!
******************************************
Need Subscribe/Unsubscribe Info?
visit http://www.planetnewton.com
******************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 01 2000 - 00:00:07 CDT