Editing Talk:Myths (Vinyl)

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in.

Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 12: Line 12:
 
I will now demonstrate: '''''[The 'demonstration' below is wrong in almost every way, just like the above claim regarding accuracy. - Tnargs]'''''
 
I will now demonstrate: '''''[The 'demonstration' below is wrong in almost every way, just like the above claim regarding accuracy. - Tnargs]'''''
  
If one were to record a sound wave simultaneously into an ideal analogue audio signal and an ideal digital audio signal, then the analogue signal will always be a more accurate reproduction than the digital one. '''''[Your use of 'ideal' is naive and unhelpful. An ideal analogue recording has infinitely low noise and distortion, and an ideal digital system has infinite bit depth and infinite sample rate. Discussing such an example obviously gets us nowhere: it is not useful to discuss it. Removing the word 'ideal' from your claim, it is only true at digital bit depths of less than about 20 -- at higher bit depths the digital overtakes the analogue for accuracy - Tnargs]'''''
+
If one were to record a sound wave simultaneously into an ideal analogue audio signal and an ideal digital audio signal, then the analogue signal will always be a more accurate reproduction than the digital one. '''''[This is only true at digital bit depths of less than 12 or 14 -- at higher bitrates the digital overtakes the analogue for accuracy - Tnargs]'''''
  
 
No matter how small the quantization of the digital audio would be, it would still be separated into discrete variation, where the analogue would, again, be unseparated, as a continuous variation wave. An ideal analogue recording could theoretically produce an exact electrical representation of the mechanical energy of the sound wave, where even an ideal digital could not. '''''[This is only true if the analogue signal has infinitely low noise, which is just as impossible in practice as a digital representation with infinite bit depth. Both are equally silly. If you consider any real-world analogue noise level, then there is a number of bits (around 20) where the digital accuracy exceeds the analogue accuracy. - Tnargs]'''''
 
No matter how small the quantization of the digital audio would be, it would still be separated into discrete variation, where the analogue would, again, be unseparated, as a continuous variation wave. An ideal analogue recording could theoretically produce an exact electrical representation of the mechanical energy of the sound wave, where even an ideal digital could not. '''''[This is only true if the analogue signal has infinitely low noise, which is just as impossible in practice as a digital representation with infinite bit depth. Both are equally silly. If you consider any real-world analogue noise level, then there is a number of bits (around 20) where the digital accuracy exceeds the analogue accuracy. - Tnargs]'''''
  
Furthermore analogue recording does not "encode." Digital audio signals replicate audio through a series of "code," that is, they represent a mechanical wave of air pressure in a "code" of information, that is then read by some decoding instrument that can produce sound waves.''' ''[There is nothing true here. Think of digital audio as a temporary storage/transfer medium, between analogue in and analogue out. It is important to remember that the output of a digital playback system is an analogue waveform, not digital. The only thing you need to compare are the three analog waveforms: [1] original analogue input; [2] analogue output through an analogue storage/transfer medium; [3] analogue output through a digital storage/transfer medium. With modern PCM audio, you will always find waveform 3 is closer to waveform 1, with waveform 2 coming last in terms of accuracy. - Tnargs]'''''
+
Furthermore analogue recording does not "encode." Digital audio signals replicate audio through a series of "code," that is, they represent a mechanical wave of air pressure in a "code" of information, that is then read by some decoding instrument that can produce sound waves.''' ''[There is nothing true here. Think of digital audio as a temporary storage/transfer medium, between analogue in and analogue out. It is important to remember that the output of a digital playback systems is analogue waveforms, not digital. The only thing you need to compare are the three analog waveforms: [1] original analogue input; [2] analogue output through an analogue storage/transfer medium; [3] analogue output through a digital storage/transfer medium. With modern PCM audio, you will always find waveform 3 is closer to waveform 1, with waveform 2 coming last in terms of accuracy. - Tnargs]'''''
  
Analogue on the other hand uses a transducer to convert the mechanical energy of the wave into electrical energy, and possibly into magnetic energy in the form of "tape," and then uses another transducer on the output end of the system to convert back from electrical or magnetic energy into mechanical energy, in other words, a sound wave. '''''[And the magnetised tape inevitably behaves as an audio compressor and limiter with non-linear curves that do not occur in digital audio (although one can replicate tape curves in digital if one wishes to be less accurate than with straight digital). - Tnargs]'''''
+
Analogue on the other hand uses a transducer to convert the mechanical energy of the wave into electrical energy, and possibly into magnetic energy in the form of "tape," and then uses another transducer on the output end of the system to convert back from electrical or magnetic energy into mechanical energy, in other words, a sound wave. '''''[And the magnetised tape inevitably behaves as an audio compressor and limiter with non-linear curves that do not occur in digital audio (although one can replicate tape curves in digital if one wishes to be less accurate). - Tnargs]'''''
  
In fact, returning to the original quote, Digital signals are actually disqualified from ''exact'' accuracy by ''their'' definition. To be digital by definition means to be sampled, or quantized, or represented as discrete, rather than continuous, variation. '''''[See above explanations. Your mistake is to look at the digital data as a 'waveform' instead of examining the analogue waveform that is created from the digital data. - Tnargs]'''''
+
In fact, returning to the original quote, Digital signals are actually disqualified from ''exact'' accuracy by ''their'' definition. To be digital by definition means to be sampled, or quantized, or represented as discrete, rather than continuous, variation. '''''[See above explanations. Your mistake is to look at the digital data as a waveform instead of examining the analogue waveform that is created from the digital data. - Tnargs]'''''
  
 
I do not disagree with the overall point of this article, but if you take vinyl as nothing more than analogous to analogue audio signals in general, then it has an accuracy advantage over any digital signal, regardless of any means taken to mask the quantization of wave variation, including dithering or any kind of sample blending. '''''[Complete nonsense. See all my comments above. Vinyl is very, very much more than 'analogous to analogue audio signals in general', and I am referring to 'more' in terms of errors. The multitudinous and gross errors of vinyl are too numerous to go over here, but they comprise not only gross noise and distortion additions, but actual signal deformations too. Modern PCM audio has ENORMOUS accuracy advantages over vinyl. - Tnargs]'''''
 
I do not disagree with the overall point of this article, but if you take vinyl as nothing more than analogous to analogue audio signals in general, then it has an accuracy advantage over any digital signal, regardless of any means taken to mask the quantization of wave variation, including dithering or any kind of sample blending. '''''[Complete nonsense. See all my comments above. Vinyl is very, very much more than 'analogous to analogue audio signals in general', and I am referring to 'more' in terms of errors. The multitudinous and gross errors of vinyl are too numerous to go over here, but they comprise not only gross noise and distortion additions, but actual signal deformations too. Modern PCM audio has ENORMOUS accuracy advantages over vinyl. - Tnargs]'''''

Please note that all contributions to Hydrogenaudio Knowledgebase are considered to be released under the GNU Free Documentation License 1.2 (see Hydrogenaudio Knowledgebase:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)