[A6] A vs D?

[Dave Scrimenti]

I'm fully aware that you shouldn't clip digital. But a previous post
suggested that since a digital signal has as many harmonics as an analog
signal, it should be just as warm. So I used the digital clipping example to
point out that it's the type, not the number of harmonics that matters. I
agree that Sony's SACD format is almost indistinguishable from analog. But
it's not just to expensive, it's not even available for multitracking, at
any price. So to me, that means we're still not there.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "UnderTow" <undertow at trance.org>
To: "Dave Scrimenti" <dscrimenti at adelphia.net>
Cc: "Ioannis Kazlaris" <ikazlar at yahoo.com>; <a6 at code404.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 5:29 PM
Subject: Re: [A6] A vs D?


>
>
> On Thu, 13 May 2004, Dave Scrimenti wrote:
>
> > It does improve a digital sound to program randomness in to it. But
since we
> > don't really understand all the variables, it doesn't quite live up to
the
> > real thing. And it takes a lot more work. Harmonic content refers to the
> > type not the number of harmonics. Overdriving analog tape or a tube amp
> > sounds great. But even a couple of clips on a digital recording sound
> > terrible. This is because of the different kinds of harmonics (noise)
that
> > are produced. As was pointed out in another note, digital isn't
continuous.
>
> This doesn't mean much as a digital signal should never be clipped. That
> is a human error and is beyond the scope of the media. That would be like
> complaining about the sound of hitting tape 30dB too loud.
>
> > 44,000 seems like a lot, but we can still hear the difference with
higher
> > sampling rates.
>
> True but most of the difference has to do with the quality of the
> anti-aliasing filters. Good converters with oversampling and good filters
> sounds quite good. Try converting through a Cranesong HEAD or something
> like that. I can live with that sound. :) (Although I am not sure
> about living without the kidney I would need to sell to afford it ;).
>
> > There will come a point when we can't hear the difference,
> > but we're not there yet.
>
> How about DSD running at 2.8 Mhz sampling rate? I think we are there. Its
> just too epxensive at the moment.
>
> > Florescent lights seem continuous, but they're not.
>
> Ah but these lights do NOT seem continuous to me. And I know alot of
> people that feel the same way.
>
> > That's why people get tired quicker with them. You're not consciously
aware
> > of it, but you're physically reacting to every one of those on-off
switches.
>
> *nod*
>
> I do think we have reached the point were humans can't tell the difference
> (even if the rest of the system is good enough which usualy isn't the
> case). It just has to become affordable and ubiquitous.
>
> UnderTow