Quote:
Originally Posted by tony666
Are you sure you are a "Bachelor of Science in Business & Degree in Acoustics". When you learn about acoustics, Fourrier, Nyquist and bandlimitation should be known properly I guess? Maybe you slept to much during class heh
heh Ooooh!
Yes, I could go very deep in that, though the acoustics I learned were more the architectural kind of acoustics. But I of course went through the Maths etc. My fellow electronicians were keener than me on those AD/DA converters etc. So FFT theory, Nyquist Freq., yes I went through all that, thanks for your concern.
I just stopped going into details on forums (especially after the DSD thread on gearslutz) because either someone with no background in that subject will come and tell me I'm 100% wrong and tell me how I should do my job (which can, sometimes, be very annoying) or I will
bore people to death.
So I use analogies... and still there is someone to come and tell me: are you reaaally an acoustician? YES I AM.
This is so bloody annoying!
Anyway, if you want my technical opinion:
I believe there is still some quantizing problems within the A/D converters. Analog does not have to choose between the two closest possible values like an A/D does (LSB theory). That's my poll analogy. while analog is somewhat made of "infinite"numbers, with ADCs you are stuck between the voltage steps of the ADC system (even if 24 bit represents more or less 6Β΅V per steps which is acceptable, 16bit with +/-153Β΅V is more of a pb to me - too big intervals).
Thus my opinion that as a recording/storage/editing medium, digital is getting very very close to analog, and will soon be
better than analog IMHO, since with 32bit fixed you have a 2^31 resolution, i.e. 2'147'483'648 quantizing intervals. that should be around 2,32^-9 V. A this point it is reasonable to admit that the resolution is better than the one of the analog systems, due to the technical limitations of the tapes, recording heads etc.
Cheers!