on 31-10-2001 9:13, Michael J. Hu=DFmann at michael_at_michael-hussmann.de wrote=
:
> sampling and quantization alone ensure that there can't be everything on
> a digital recording. As far as I know, the SACD uses a higher sampling
> frequency and a bigger sample size, so technically it has to be better
> than Red Book CDDA (not that I would hear any difference, to be sure).
So my gut feeling was right (and maybe my memory helped) Analog recordings
have their own limitations, even when they are of and it is partly about
sampling rates.
> different kind than the limitations of digital recordings. No recording
> can capture everything, so invariably we will have to accept a compromise=
.
Agreed, though there clearly differences.
>> Yes, and it will sound worse compared to the original.
>> Not as bad as MP3 though.
>=20
> A double-blind study conducted by the German computer magazine c't
> revealed that only very young people could distinguish high-quality MP3
> tracks from CD tracks, and even they couldn't say which was which. At my
> age (43) it would be unwise to invest in high-end audio equipment.
Well at 41 I can still pick out blind an original and an CD-R copy, haven't
tried it with MP3 yet, do know that I bought a Cube because the sound of an=
y
other computer drives me crazy and even the extra silent drive in my Cube
makes way too much sound for me.
Don't know about these youngsters, they weren't of the loud MP3 on your ear=
s
often in the disco with boom boxes in their cars kind of youngsters I hope.=
.
;-)
Robert Benschop
-- This is the Newtontalk mailinglist - http://www.newtontalk.net To unsubscribe or manage: visit the above link or mailto:newtontalk-request_at_newtontalk.net?Subject=unsubscribe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Nov 01 2001 - 10:02:57 EST