Posted on 11/23/2023 4:04:31 PM PST by Squawk 8888
You’re better connected to the industry than I am- and my uncle started a record label in the 1970s that made money until he “officially” retired in the 1990s.
So THAT’s why Homer is a star :-D
Fun fact: Grand Funk Railroad based its name on the Grand Trunk, the winner of a race to be Canada’s second transcontinental railway. When it went bankrupt in the 1900s, Ottawa stepped in and consolidated it with the rest to become Canadian National Railways (CNR). CNR was sold to the private sector in the 1990s.
You partially missed my point: the *harmonics* created by the interactions and interference of both the sounds we *do* hear and the sounds we do *not* hear fill the spaces within the music lost by digital reproduction. Think 5 Hz to 30 KHz. 22 KHz is good, and few if any folks can hear up there, but it *does* interact with the frequencies we *can* hear, helping shape the sound.
An excellent example of the inferiority of digital sound to analogue is what a hard metal on metal strike sounds like in real life versus what that same strike sounds like on digital. Watch (listen to) pretty much any testing stage of “Forged in Fire” for an easy example of what I am talking about.
The limitations and losses caused by digital recording/replay are well known. As I stated earlier, digital is just fine where acoustics are marginal, but analogue absolutely outshines in ideal conditions.
That is why live performances are so much better than EITHER! Why we are having this debate is puzzling to me.
Trust me l understand how PCM works. The audio quality of digital is directly affect by the sample rate. One of the the reasons analog sounds better is the harmonics produced by interaction between frequency elements in the content. The reason nigher sample rates sounds better is it picks up more of these. So a higher sample rate is not “wasted” as you phrased it. It does not take an audiophile rig to hear it. Even in the car if you pay the extra for higher quality streaming you can hear the difference if you “A-B” it.
On this great song - I’m absolutely certain Lady Antebellum (now caved to “politically correct” ‘Lady A’) used this song’s structure for their hit “I Need You Now”. Alan has a clear cut plagiarism case here if he chooses to pursue it.
You audio snobs need more whine with your jeez. I think Don W is right on saying vinyl preserves and conveys a specific depth and quality that digital fails to recreate.
Not unlike modern digital movie-making compared to using real bulk film and the hard-learned techniques great film makers of the last century brought us (Hitchcock, Kubrick, Lean, etc.).
I recall extremely esoteric substances used to make the needles for LPs that cost hundreds of dollars for those chasing the purest sound. It was nearly a religion for them and I enjoyed many hours listening to their hobby. Consuming wine and cheese.
Good post. Personally l am not, ahem, an audio snob. In the case of music l fully understand the quality for convenience trade off. Vinyl is a pain in cahootche. With digital I have total radon access so if l want to band X’s song on track 3 of their 4th LP, boom l can bring up. With vinyl I am digging through the shelf for the LP, putting it on the table, placing the stylus on the track like a surgeon ugh what a pain and digital has improved a lot. When l really want a treat l will play a one of my select 12” singles and marvel at just how good it sounds.
What, exactly, does that do? I've been researching for the best car player NOT overworthy of my 2000 Camry ($250 max) and am overwhelmed with the sheer volume of products flowing out of slave-laboring nations that are poorly made and (I suspect) under-powered.
I'm told that the best have high capacity memory and processors but I find the specs for most of these exclude that for flashy snake-oil BS that means nothing for the discerning consumer.
Like that people prefer an actual control knob when driving because screen icon pressing is dangerously distracting in the real world. A good mission for "Consumer Reports" if they'd take it on.
“the specs for most of these exclude that for flashy snake-oil BS“
I agree with you on this point. The high quality audio world is full of hype and BS to sell expensive diminishing return audio equipment and it has always been that way.
I’ll have to defer to you guys on your point- I normally use at least 196k at my gigs and broadcasts.
I actually agree with you about digital movies but not for the same reason. Let’s leave it at that...
In the video realm compression becomes a big factor. To stream 4k you pretty much have to compress due to bandwidth constraints and that degrades video and limits audio Chanels etc. if you want the best video/audio nothing beats a physical 4k DVD because there is no compression. There is that quality/convenience trade off again.
Engineering has always been about trade-offs.
Yep.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.