No one is allowed to have an opinion on vinyl vs. digital unless they have at least a basic understanding of the Shannon sampling theorem. Seriously, if you don't know what the Nyquist rate is, shut the hell up.
Note: There are still valid arguments to be had in this domain. They just don't include the phrase 'warmth of analog' at any point.
Note: There are still valid arguments to be had in this domain. They just don't include the phrase 'warmth of analog' at any point.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
In fact, I don't, and I tend to prefer very crisp sound. But this is reassuring - the whole warmth of analog bit argument confused me, except as translated as "I like my sound soft and fuzzy" and... yeah, other ways to get that.
no subject
no subject
no subject
A) "warmth of analog" usually refers to harmonic distortion in analog power amplifiers, not so much the source material. And there is a legitimate argument that distorted sound is "warmer" than less-distorted sound.
B) The Shannon theorem only proves that it is *possible* to reconstruct a signal up to the Nyquist limit. It doesn't give a method for doing so, and in fact, many of the methods used have significant shortcomings. As I Understand It, I Am Not A Signal Processing Expert.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
On the other hand, if I see plans for a spectroscpe good enough to see Fraunhoffer lines in the solar spectrum built from an old CD as the diffraction grating, one simple lens, and some cardboard, I'll be convinced that digital is better.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
Past *that*, well, and I say this as (apparently) an analog electrical engineer, *all* signals are digital, because electrons are chunky. The difference between 'analog' and 'digital' is merely how small a chunk we're talking about.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)