On 12/24/2012 10:12 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Mon, 2012-12-24 at 09:59 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
but there's no data loss
Oops, might be considered as "misinformation". My apologize that English
isn't my native language ;).
Yes, there's data loss for records too ;). But usually there are no gaps
etc. for a record that isn't broken into pieces.
Btw. analog is coming back, for studio productions and for consumers.
Psychoacoustics are a very interesting and highly complex field :D Some
people love vinyl (which is also a bandlimited medium, sice the record
is non rigid and the needle has a non zero mass and some other reasons,
too) because it sounds "better" to them. That has nothing to do with
whether a vinyl record represents a signal more faithfully than a CD and
a good D/A converter.
I play guitar as my main instrument. I like tube amps better than most
transistor amps simply for the reason that they add something to the
signal (all these complex non linear components working together to
produce something very pleasant to me). A simple transistor amp is
measurably so much more faithful in amplifying my guitar's pickup
outputs than a tube amp of the same complexity. The imperfections in
this case are not undesirable, but rather they are experimented with and
fully embraced by musicians (and audiences)..
The same argument can be made for analogue equipment in the recording
and production domain. Tube mic preamps, analogue circuits in mixing
boards, etc.. And there's nothing wrong with that at all :D
Some people really like the imperfections introduced by a vinyl playback
chain.
Here's a little thought experiment: Get the best available digital
recording and playback chain, and make a great recording of your vinyl
player's output for some vinyl records (preferably some that you are not
familiar with). Now make a double blind test between direct playback
from vinyl and the digital recordings of the vinyl. My hypothesis is
that you cannot discriminate between the two in such a way that you'll
find the direct vinyl playback better than the digital recording of the
vinyl (in a statistically significant fashion). Or even reliably
discriminate which is which (i.e. which comes directly from vinyl and
which from the recording).
Now do it the other way around: Take some digital masters of albums and
cut vinyl records from then. Now do a double blind test. My hypothesis
is that you will be able to discriminate the vinyl from the digital
playback for the simple reason that the vinyl cutting and playback chain
introduces loads of imperfections that will be clearly audible. You
might prefer the sound of the vinyl in a sense similar to a guitar
player preferring the sound of a tube amp over some transistor amp. But
that doesn't tell us anything about the faithfulness of reproduction. If
you like the vinyl cut of the albums better than you simply like the
artefacts and imperfections.
Analogue equipment has its place and knowing when to use it and when not
and being clear about the reasons is a good thing. Claiming that
analogue equipment is better in audio reproduction is just simply wrong
as a blanket statement..
Flo
--
Florian Paul Schmidt
http://fps.io
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
