PossibilitySuperb465 t1_j1zza1c wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Wiil CD's make a comeback like Vinyl? by trukises
lol you are so impassioned about this, but tell me, what is the bitrate of tape or vinyl?
Analog media is not directly comparable to digital formats, and in a sense all digital formats are lossy by comparison. Just as film (read: tape; analog) can be used to produce 4k versions of film (state of the art digital format) where as DVD (old digital; highly compressed; lossy) cannot, tape can be used to produce the highest possible quality transfer to CDs (old digital; lossy but usually acceptable/inaudible) and even higher bitrate formats; or vinyl. Vinyl does have distortion, and particularly it can degrade over time, but any digital transfer was lossy (in a different way; it is subtractive) to begin with.
And yes, any additive modification of the source audio by the media itself is basically a form of distortion, but people have long preferred tube amps due to their distortion properties, which are frequently very pleasing even on settings that sound very "clean". It simply adds character--but if you want to be more of an engineer about it, it adds characteristics to the wave forms it produces or records.
So anyway, I'm not really persuaded by your "audio quality is objective" argument. Resolution is objective, but not always comparable between media... so not a very good way of comparing things, obviously.
In conclusion, there were some very good machines which we now consider old. They are still very good, especially in certain aesthetic ways.
Do I own a record player? No. It's expensive and wasteful and silly in my opinion. But there are differences and I wouldn't begrudge anyone that hobby if they have the time and money for it.
JHDarkLeg t1_j20l4ze wrote
>all digital formats are lossy by comparison
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem
Digital isn't lossy within the Nyquist bandwidth, it's mathematically provable. CDs do not utilize lossy compression algorithms like DVDs do.
PossibilitySuperb465 t1_j20nu4e wrote
That's really interesting, but is that the same as saying audio "quality" won't benefit from a higher sample rate? I actually can't tell from reading it. It seems like it establishes a minimum sample rate sufficient for reproduction of the wave form, but there is still interpolation occurring in the process, which seems to imply higher rates may impact the result to me.
My point was that analog media are not constructed of data points at all, which remains true, but I'm interested to understand more, as you are correct that CDs are *not* directly comparable to DVDs in terms of using lossy compression.
JHDarkLeg t1_j20q9mb wrote
A higher sampling rate will capture a larger frequency range, but it won't improve the sound quality within that range.
The interpolation you mention is called quantization error, caused by having to use discrete steps rather than an infinitely analog level. Quantization error effects the maximum dynamic range of the recording. A 16-bit CD has a dynamic range of 96dB vs about 70dB for vinyl.
Analog media does have it's own "data points" as well. The size of the magnetic particles on tape or the size of vinyl that is required to still be strong enough to not break when in contact with the stylus. It's harder to measure but it's there.
Regarding compression, CDs do not use lossy compression whereas DVDs use MPEG2 lossy compression.
PossibilitySuperb465 t1_j20t087 wrote
>Analog media does have it's own "data points" as well. The size of the magnetic particles on tape or the size of vinyl that is required to still be strong enough to not break when in contact with the stylus. It's harder to measure but it's there.
Do you know if it tends to be more or less information than a digital transfer of the same material on CD?
Half-baked thought: I wonder if there is any audible characteristic to regularity/irregularity of information density on a media. Like I assume CDs would be very regular, where as tape may actually be inconsistent in this respect.
PossibilitySuperb465 t1_j20qxzl wrote
Sorry, intended to agree with you about CDs/DVDs using compression/not using compression. Edited my previous post to fix the typo.
In terms of capture, missing a frequency range sounds like it compromises 'fidelity' in some audible sense if those ranges are indeed audible--all of this as compared with analog media.
Simply asked: Is it possible that someone could hear and prefer/dislike the sound of audio recorded at above the threshold described by the nyquist theorem?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments