XPost: rec.arts.drwho
From: doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
In article <10mrrq5$3qhr0$1@dont-email.me>,
Your Name wrote:
>On 2026-02-15 05:57:18 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
>
>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 16:16:19 +1300, Your Name wrote:
>>
>>> On 2026-02-15 02:23:32 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 13:47:06 +1300, Your Name wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The recording studios also use a much better digital equipment
>>>>> than home music players or what is released on the CD or online /
>>>>> streaming services, so what you're hearing has been downsampled.
>>>>
>>>> Are you admitting that digital technology can possibly be good enough
>>>> to serve as source material for your precious vinyl?
>>>
>>> I didn't say whether it was "good enough" or not, simply what happens.
>>
>> You used the term “downsampled” to refer to consumer delivery formats
>> like vinyl.
>
>Actually I said "released on CD or online". Studios will have far
>better quality equipment, so the digital recording will need to be
>downsampled for any other home-based digital releases. Vinyl releases
>will be different since they aren't digital.
>
>
>
>>> For a CD, the sounds are downsampled to CD-quality from the higher
>>> quality studio digital recordings. Similarly with various streaming
>>> qualities.
>>
>> Streaming and file formats can be in any sample rate and depth desired.
>> No need for any “downsampling” at all.
>
>Downsampled from the higher quality studio equipment, as well as often
>being compressed.
>
>
>
>>> For vinyl, it will depend on how exactly the vinyl master is made, but
>>> it still won't be a purely digital recording, even though the studio
>>> source was. There will be minute changes and differences. Together,
>>> that *could* mean some people hear (or more precisely *feel*) a
>>> difference in quality.
>>
>> So analog losses actually *improve* the perception in quality?
>>
>> Does this go for the dust and groove wear as well?
>
>Not if your keep your equipment and collection clean.
>
>The same can be said for CDs - dust on the lens or disc can affect play-back.
>
>
>
>>>>> But the on and off bits of digital audio and video can never match the
>>>>> near-infinite uniqueness of analogue.
>>>>
>>>> Quantum theory says no.
>>>
>>> Multiverse theory says every peice of music exists in every format and
>>> quality ... somewhere. :-p
>>
>> Regardless of your attempt to distract from it, your original statement
>> remains nonsense.
>
>Digital = on or off, and only at the sampled timeframes
>Analogue = variable and constantly changing, even if only minutely
>
>
>
>
>>>>> Even if you were digitally recording at a bazillion samples per second,
>>>>> you'd still be missing things between each sample.
>>>>
>>>> Fun fact: your nervous system is basically digital (nerve impulses
>>>> either fire or don’t fire). So you already do.
>>>
>>> Yes and no (and depends on who you ask). The human systems, including
>>> the nervous system, are not really strictly analogue nor digital. They
>>> are basically a mix of / somewhere between the two.
>>
>> Nevertheless, it is a fact that nerve impulses either fire or don’t
>> fire, there is no in-between. That doesn’t depend on whom you ask; go
>> ask any expert.
>>
>> (No doubt you’ll get the typical contrarian answers from audiophiles
>> and other non-experts, so don’t bother ...)
>
>Yes, they fire / don't fire, but the *rate* at which they do that does
>vary depending on the circumstances.
>
>
Off the shelf and let us see how ell it works.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
All I want to hear from Jesus is WEll Done Good and Faithful Servant.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
