+ Reply to Thread
Page 16 of 25 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 246

Thread: Good analog and good digital converge?

  1. #151
    Join Date: Apr 2015

    Location: Central Virginia

    Posts: 1,736
    I'm Russell.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by struth View Post
    One's ears are not an oscilloscope fortunately.
    Yes it is. I’ve heard very bright, overly detailed stereos before, and it’s quite interesting at first, hearing many fine details. But I find that I grow tired of it quickly, I much before a warmer presentation, which most call colored. Distortion is just a part of life, there will never be audio playback without it.

    Russell

  2. #152
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,778
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alphaGT View Post
    But it is easy to see on a scope that the signal coming out does not match the signal going in. Harmonic distortions, crossover distortions, etc., etc., and then there is Digital. You take the waveform and chop it into tens of thousands of pieces, and assign a number to it. Then taking those numbers, try to put it back together. And like dragging a rock around in a groove, it really is amazing that it works at all! And doesn’t sound like a squealing siren. So, you stitch the square waves back together and it looks like stair cases going up and down, so a filter smooths the edges off until it resembles an analog waveform. You’ve got a nice smooth waveform that sounds great! But, it is not an exact match of the signal that went in. Due to averaging, it’s a very close approximation, but not exact.
    l
    Audiophile myth. It may not be perfectly exact but it is exact enough that any difference is way beyond the threshold of hearing. In terms of producing the analogue waveform exactly, digital is way beyond vinyl. Orders of magnitude better.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  3. #153
    Join Date: Jan 2013

    Location: Birmingham

    Posts: 6,772
    I'm James.

    Default

    Wrong, wrong , wrong.

  4. #154
    Join Date: Apr 2012

    Location: N E Kent

    Posts: 51,624
    I'm Geoff.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alphaGT View Post
    Yes it is. I’ve heard very bright, overly detailed stereos before, and it’s quite interesting at first, hearing many fine details. But I find that I grow tired of it quickly, I much before a warmer presentation, which most call colored. Distortion is just a part of life, there will never be audio playback without it.

    Russell
    A properly detailed sound is a product of transparency and system balance should not be a factor.

  5. #155
    Join Date: Oct 2012

    Location: The Black Country

    Posts: 6,089
    I'm Alan.

    Default

    Fight fight fight

    Just jesting but James is correct.' Way beyond the threshold of hearing' is just so optimistic.

    I've yet to hear a digital system that gives the same spacial information you can get from vinyl and I've heard some of the best.

  6. #156
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,778
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebottle View Post
    Fight fight fight

    Just jesting but James is correct.' Way beyond the threshold of hearing' is just so optimistic.

    I've yet to hear a digital system that gives the same spacial information you can get from vinyl and I've heard some of the best.
    But you making assumptions about the reasons for that which are incorrect. We are not arguing about the outcome (i.e 'the listening') it is the reasons for the outcome where there is disagreement.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  7. #157
    Join Date: Jan 2008

    Location: gone

    Posts: 11,519
    I'm gone.

    Default

    Well, it all depends what you think you are hearing.
    Genuine recorded sounds which for some baffling reason aren't captured by digital, or analog distortion artifacts that you happen to like maybe?
    .

  8. #158
    Join Date: Oct 2012

    Location: The Black Country

    Posts: 6,089
    I'm Alan.

    Default

    You've lost me there Martin

  9. #159
    Join Date: Oct 2012

    Location: The Black Country

    Posts: 6,089
    I'm Alan.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jandl100 View Post
    Well, it all depends what you think you are hearing.
    Genuine recorded sounds or distortion artifacts that you happen to like maybe?
    How can distortion artifacts give such a sense of space and depth? Someone convince me.

  10. #160
    Join Date: Jan 2013

    Location: Birmingham

    Posts: 6,772
    I'm James.

    Default

    Just read a great article on digital and analogue. Its conclusion was analogue was good for audio and digital was good for running computers.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 16 of 25 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •