Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wwittman so your premise that digital can reprodice that sound after analogue has "added" whatever it adds, is, in my strongly held view, wrong. |
Yes! Thats what I was getting at...
Quote:
|
You can't add analogue sound to digital anymore than you can add the resolution of an oil painting to a reproduced newspaper photo. there are only so many dots.
|
I like that.
Quote:
Interestingly all of my favourite records have things left, right or dead centre.
Not "panned" to a thousand different places.
|
I agree entirely, It was just an example of how the lack of digital resolution (when compared to analog) is present in all parts of digital. All of it starting at the initial conversion.
Quote:
|
but basically dynamic range is not an issue with digital. It was more of an issue with analog.
|
Analog probably retains more detail and precision in 10dB's than what digital does in its entire 144.50dB theoretical dynamic range.
Quote:
|
The problem is not in the resolution. And since digital can record and playback analog sound, it is theoretically possible to emulate it to the point that nobody can tell.
|
They already are trying to emulate it... thats what the filters are for in converters. Otherwise we'd be left with the jagged jigsaw of straight lines that is digital audio.