The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Famous Fun Thread: Analog v. Digital--Which is "The King" of great sound quality
Old 26th July 2005
  #211
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Here are some of an eariler poster's questions:

"Sampling rate isnt good enough today according to who? Audio Engineers?"

The answer to those questions based upon the direct experience of audio engineers AND consumers (including many "pro-sumers") is that all the underlying technology in the the A-to-D and D-to-A process sucks and should be tossed out. The Digital Math Scoundrels have proven over time that they have outlived their uselessness and belong in that class of nasty digital "artifacts."

Flush them all down the sewer, all the rats can eat sewage along with all their nasty digital "artifacts."
Old 26th July 2005
  #212
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by themaidsroom
all i'd say in closing like flavor flav : "don't believe the hype"
use your own ears
spend a day in a local 2" room before
believing that analog isn't for you
certainly before spending thousands on
more devices to make digital sound acceptable
or that emulate tape..........


be well

- jack

I personally can't believe anyone with ears could listen to a Pro Tools master (or any DAW Master) vs. a well recorded Studer/Neve combo and not roll his little DAW right back into the parking lot and into traffic.

TH
Old 26th July 2005
  #213
Lives for gear
 
themaidsroom's Avatar
 

not to mention the hours, days, weeks, months, years
that your life as an engineer is involved - your ears, your listening
fatigue...........



- jack
Old 26th July 2005
  #214
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Or commit suicide for having wasted all that money on digital trash...or feeling stupid for buying into the damn lies of the Digital Math Scoundrels...or simply driving a big semi-truck over all this digital horse**** because it all sounds like ass.

All the Digital Math Scoundrels should have tatoos on their foreheads that proclaim:

"Digital Math Scoundrel---I tell lies."
Old 27th July 2005
  #215
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Always remember:

"Math IS the last refuge of scoundrels."

Now what to do with all the Digital Math Scoundrels is something that needs some kind of final solution, some kind of fitting torture must be found for these bastards.

Oh, I know...we could fatigue their ears with MPfreakin3 clips until they all go insane and kill themselves...
Old 27th July 2005
  #216
Here for the gear
 

Is the horse still twitching?

The original thread here was a poll to see who liked analog recording and who liked digital recording. I'll make a point or two then step aside.

I do know a little bit about how recording technology works (analog and digital). In my experience, most of the criticism of "digital sound" has actually been criticism of engineering techniques. For example, how many people who work with digital audio use brick wall limiters? (more) How many people who work with analog use brick wall limiters? (less) It's kind of like synthesizers in the early 80s. Synths didn't suck, but since there were so few musicians who knew how to really play a synth, a lot of crappy synth music got made. Wanna make a digital recording sound like analog? Try putting a few high pass filters on your tracks and listen to how the low end cleans up.

Poorly made equipment doesn't sound as good as well made gear. That's true of analog and digital. Would you expect a $500.00 mixer to sound really good, whether it was analog or digital? Sure, a top of the line analog system sounds good. So does a top of the line digital system. A great deal of the criticism of "digital sound" is actually criticism of cheaply made analog circuitry.
For example. What is the most important component in terms of noise floor and dynamic range?
The power supply.

Both of the above points have to do with market demand. A lot of pop music is really hard to listen to now. That's not because math scoundrels are conspiring. It's because if you can hypnotize a teenager with a compressed and autotuned mix, you'll make money. You'll make the money selling junk music to the teenager and you'll make money from the audio engineer who wants to make compressed and autotuned beats to sell to teenagers.

I hate mp3s. I hated cassettes more. So what?

Why do we still use vacuum tubes in audio? Because they add harmonically related distortion. A decent digital system does not add audiable distortion. Does that mean digital sucks? No, it means that humans like distortion. I use analog modeling in my digital system. Analog modeling generally means distortion. Therefore I will not say that "digital sound sucks because it doesn't distort the way analog does". It can if you want it to.

Lastly, although I did fail math in school, I respect learning and thinking. Listed below are a few of the scoundrels that some would like to punish.

zip




Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.* ~Albert Einstein

I don't agree with mathematics; the sum total of zeros is a frightening figure.* ~Stanislaw J. Lec

Go down deep enough into anything and you will find mathematics.* ~Dean Schlicter

Music is the pleasure the human mind experiences from counting without being aware that it is counting.* ~Gottfried Leibniz

To most outsiders, modern mathematics is unknown territory.* Its borders are protected by dense thickets of technical terms; its landscapes are a mass of indecipherable equations and incomprehensible concepts.* Few realize that the world of modern mathematics is rich with vivid images and provocative ideas.* ~Ivars Peterson

But mathematics is the sister, as well as the servant, of the arts and is touched with the same madness and genius.* ~Harold Marston Morse

Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human.* At best he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house.* ~Robert Heinlein

Mathematics is the supreme judge; from its decisions there is no appeal.* ~Tobias Dantzig

Physics is mathematical not because we know so much about the physical world, but because we know so little; it is only its mathematical properties that we can discover.* ~Bertrand Russell

The laws of nature are but the mathematical thoughts of God.* ~Euclid

The man ignorant of mathematics will be increasingly limited in his grasp of the main forces of civilization.* ~John Kemeny

Uneven numbers are the gods' delight.* ~Virgil

One cannot escape the feeling that these mathematical formulas have an independent existence and an intelligence of their own, that they are wiser than we are, wiser even than their discoverers...* ~Heinrich Hertz

If there is a God, he's a great mathematician.* ~Paul Dirac
1
Share
Old 27th July 2005
  #217
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Glad some people would make the Digital Math Scoundrels and their pieces of silicon **** into Gods, my ears tell me they are *not* Gods. Instead, their thin-wafers slice and dice up the sound to produce really Crappy Digitial Sound Quality. God does not ruin the music---Digital Math Scoundrels do.

"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,
they are not certain; as far as they are certain,
they do not refer to reality."
---Albert Einstein---



The Digital Math Scoundrels are a long, long, way from getting it right (and they know it too) In the meantime, the Digital Math Scoundrels use numerous lies and fraud to con the suckers of the world out of their money.

The dialogue between the group of Digital Math Soundrels that appears on a previous page of this thread is right on point. (see, pg. 7) There, you find the statement that "A sucker is born every minute."
Old 27th July 2005
  #218
Lives for gear
 
themaidsroom's Avatar
 

digital doesn't sound as good.....
i bougt a new cd - from last year - actually
a cd that is from 1982 - the name of this band is talking heads
i had the vinyl - but i wanted to hear the extra tracks
"born under punches" made it all worth it musically
so much of the rest of it sounded
glassy - like the lows had been cut relative to the 23 year old piece of vinyl......

mp3's are like holograms to me
cassettes could rock

as recording mediums go - walter sear and i agreed on the phone 2 weeks ago
that
the love of digital was simply surreal ............like cocteau

be well
use your own ears

- jack
Old 27th July 2005
  #219
Gear Maniac
 
Larrchild's Avatar
 

Those guys don't record. On paper, things can look better than they really are due to math they haven't invented which will probably make us all cringe at how digital sounds, looking back in 10 years. We are close. But I'm for super sample rates and more bits and all that. soon. *horse twitches*

"He's a great mathamatician but he gets a shiity snare sound" ~ Larrchild
Old 27th July 2005
  #220
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zippernoize
Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human.* At best he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house.* ~Robert Heinlein

hey that one sounds like he is talking about johnny b ...
Old 27th July 2005
  #221
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Alphakerk, perhaps you'd like to know that is was my math prof who taught me that famous quote above by Albert Einstein. However, lame ass personal pot shots suggest that they may come from those who love Autotune and Beat Detective.

BTW, do you love Autotune and Beat Detective?

Remember:

At best, all math is nothing but an approximation, it is *not* reality. Math is nothing more than an absract concept that only exists in people's heads.

Again, math is *not* reality.


And digital math is worse because of all its "anomalies, artifacts, and stinking rounding errors."

Face the facts man, Digital Sound Quality still sucks and the Digital Math Scoundrels have conned you.
Old 27th July 2005
  #222
Lives for gear
 
De chromium cob's Avatar
 

Stupidest thread EVER!
Attached Thumbnails
Famous Fun Thread: Analog v. Digital--Which is "The King" of great sound quality-cbg.jpg  
Old 27th July 2005
  #223
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

While you are certainly entitled to your personal opinion, there are many people all over the world who do not think it is at all stupid to demand higher sound quality than what is currently available from ****ty sounding digital products.

Bad chips, bad formats, bad sound...all because of the Digital Math Scoundrels' mass fraud.
Old 27th July 2005
  #224
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny B
BTW, do you love Autotune and Beat Detective?
not particularly... dont use either. why?


so now there is MATH and DIGITAL MATH huh? wow. digital math. i bet you think its colder and harsher than analog math.
Old 27th July 2005
  #225
Here for the gear
 

so much colder in fact that you have to heat up the calculator, or abacus in Johnny B's case, prior to usage....
Old 27th July 2005
  #226
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Math, and especially digital math with only 16 bits is cold and distant just like the abstract concepts and mere approximations they represent...

Some can love 16-bit CDs that say:

0101001100100011 is reality...

People can delude themselves and fall victim to the Digital Math Scoundrels' ongoing fraud.

Analogue, on the other hand, is warm and nice to get close to...like a good woman is nice to get close to.

Some may be satisfied with a woman that exists only in a fabricated and false digital reality...but to me that's way too cold...too distant...too abstract...and unreal...just like digital sound quality is a piss poor substitute for the music done on real deal analogue.

I pity the fools who have wasted thousands and thousands of dollars chasing the Digital Math Scondrels' fraudulent representations that their chips sound good when any shootout will show that digital Sound Quality still sucks when compared to great analogue.

So which one is supposed to give the "fix" this freakin' week?

16-bits and 44.1
24 bits at 96K
24 bits at 192K

Some other numbers?

Oh, and who could not cozy up to those wonderful FIR filters?...Now that's warm....like a woman....NOT.

Here's the honest-to-God's truth...all of the underlying digital technology and all the lame formats should be trashed...

It's time to replace all that passe tech with some brand new tech that might have a chance of getting it right.

Hell, anyone who has any experience with anything digital knows God damn good and well that:

Everything digital is obsolete on the day it was designed.
Old 28th July 2005
  #227
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Torture for all the Digital Math Scoundrels...make them listen to MPFreakin3's until the all go insane and become deaf...

Uhmm...we'll have to modify that last part and increase the punishment because they all must be deaf to begin with...
Old 28th July 2005
  #228
Here for the gear
 

Yep. Still twitching..., but I'll go another round ;-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny B
The answer to those questions based upon the direct experience of audio engineers AND consumers (including many "pro-sumers") is that all the underlying technology in the the A-to-D and D-to-A process sucks and should be tossed out. The Digital Math Scoundrels have proven over time that they have outlived their uselessness and belong in that class of nasty digital "artifacts."

Flush them all down the sewer, all the rats can eat sewage along with all their nasty digital "artifacts."

"The primary problem of why digital still sounds like **** is all the garbage that the Math Scoundrels have done with those pieces of **** silicon chips they call "converters"..the only thing they do is convert music with life into music that is dead sounding and ice cold when compared to great analogue."
If I understand Johnny B correctly, he has a problem with A/D D/A converters. (Keep in mind of course, that analog circuitry is involved in both of those stages).

Johnny B, if your problem is with the conversion stage, are you implying that once convertion is improved, digital audio has the potential to sound good? If that's the case, why would you state that "math scoundrels" (engineers) have outlived their usefullness? How will a technology improve if there is no one to improve it?

Oh wait. Your quote says they have outlived their uselessness. That's deep. I have to think about that one for a moment...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny B
Nyquist followers and the math and engineering people said the CD format was "all you'll ever need," 16-bits was "all you'll ever need," and 41Khz was "all you'll ever need." These jerks must all have tin ears because they were flat wrong.
Johnny, would you mind printing a reference to the above quote? I've never seen any quote from an engineer or math person that said such a thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny B
We also know that so many math errors, truncation problems, and "anomalies" are directly introduced by the digital conversion process, that to follow that old path may not be the most productive way to solve the digital sound quality problem, we already know digital sound quality sucks when compared to great analogue.
You throw around the WE a little loosely. I disagree with you that digital audio recording quality sucks, so I'm definitely not part of that we.

The basic premise of an analog recording is that analog is a second generation representation of the original source. Digital recording is a description of the source. Neither is perfect. As you know, every time you re-record a signal using analog technology, you lose information. That proves that you are losing information even with the first generation. We also know that you can copy digital data as many times as you like and the data will not change. What this points out is not that digital is perfect. It points out that analog is not perfect. So really, it's a question of which set of imperfections you want to choose.
I respect the fact that you don't like the "sound" of digital audio, but your logic that digital has imperfections doesn't negate the fact that analog has imperfections. Why then are you not demanding better quality analog components? Could it be that you don't mind the imperfections of analog? If that's so, I personally have no problem with that. However, the generalization that "digital audio sucks" is therefore a useless generalization. I contend that analog can (and does for many in the real world) suck a lot worse than digital.

JohnnyB, I don't think anybody who reads this board would say that any technology is perfect and doesn't need to be improved. If your point is that recording technology needs to be improved, you've made that point and nobody has disagreed with you.
If your point is to actually debate analog vs digital recording, just making generalizations about one or the other format is not debating.
If you are unhappy that digital recording exists or is prevalent, you've made that point.
In my opinion, dissing the basic concepts of math is a waste of time. Likewise, dissing people who respect or use math is also pointless. If you disagree with me I'd be interested to hear why.
You have mentioned many times that math scoundrels have lied and people have been duped. Do you believe that this board is populated by dupers or dupees? If so, isn't that disrespectful to people who engage you in a real debate?

Besides repeating your opinion (because in spite of your assertations, what you say is open to debate and therefore opinion), what exactly is your point?

zip
Old 28th July 2005
  #229
Anyone ever read the story of Br'er Rabbit and the Tar Baby?
Old 28th July 2005
  #230
Here for the gear
 

yeh, but I really liked the one about Platos Cave!
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htm

zip
Old 28th July 2005
  #231
Plato's cave... an excellent metaphor for digital sound...

... wait... does that mean Johnny's subverted my thinking?


Ah, it's all a big solipsistic fantasy, anyway, babe...

We're all just shadows on the wall.
Old 28th July 2005
  #232
Lives for gear
 
themaidsroom's Avatar
 

Hybrid is the way to go.................

i would love to read another post from someone who is currently working with
a hybrid system ie - they can track to both pro tools and analog simultaneously,
they can quickly move 2" tape into digital and vice versa, they can lock the two
systems together and with mute buttons, really listen to each signal, this is
the only environment where one doesn't have to rely on memory

i have done this many times with young people working here....comparing
2" 16 track or 2" 8 track with 96 k or 192k pro tools - even the most novice
of engineers can hear the difference in two bars.....i would be hesitant to
work with someone to whom this enormous difference wasn't apparent.....
here in nyc i am unaware of any engineers working with both formats that
do not prefer the tape......

that being said, living in the real world many artists have limited budgets
and leave with fire wire drives and not reels - they go home or to another facility
and work on the tracks - they bring them back and if we can lock up the tapes
we do; if there have been such significant changes to the program material
that it must be mixed from pro tools - we do that - mixing it to 1/2" tape
this hybrid way of working has allowed many projects to add great depth
to their records without overly compromising their budgets - sometimes
2 days on either side of a record - less than $3,000 usually - plus some tape
costs - maybe another $800 - this adds enough to the sonic palette that
alot of the lines bewteen the mediums get blurred..........
and as modern music is pretty crunchy most of the time , i'm all for these lines
being blurred............

if you can go all analog do it - listen to the 2 2" 16 tracks working together on
john lennon's "milk and honey" - wow, even the cd reveals how great that
can sound..........no one can make a computer sound like that.......

to anyone out there who is curious, try this approach, spend a day with a great
studer with 16 track heads and pro tools and lock them up.....listen instrument
by instrument - have no concern for why one is flawed according to this person
or that - listen with your own ears.....
you can still spend weeks with your computer.............
you can still save thousands.................

be well

jack
Old 28th July 2005
  #233
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Well said.
Old 28th July 2005
  #234
Here for the gear
 

Ok, now we're talkin!

Quote:
Originally Posted by themaidsroom
if you can go all analog do it - listen to the 2 2" 16 tracks working together on
john lennon's "milk and honey" - wow, even the cd reveals how great that
can sound..........no one can make a computer sound like that.......
jack
This statement contradicts itself. How could the CD reveal how great the analog tape is if it can't reproduce the sound?

I have worked with tape and digital side by side. They certainly can sound different, but that's because of the signal processing introduced by the analog gear, not by something the digital gear takes away.

If I want "analog slam", I don't need tape to get it and frankly I don't want the problems that tape introduces. There are other ways to get the distortion that a tape deck brings, whether by front end analog processors or by DSP.

What analog reverbs do you like better than Lexicon? EMT Plate maybe? Anything else? If you're really old school and put speakers and mics in rooms to get your verbs, have you compared that to a convolution reverb and what do you think of that?

I had heard that Lowell George used a 3m tape deck simply as a signal processor for his slide guitar. I wonder if his guitar tech had to carry that thing around?!

Yes, PODs sound awful. So did the Rockman and that was all analog.

Would you really prefer a real Mellotron to a sampler loaded with Mellotron sounds?

JohnnyB, will you answer any of my questions? Are we having a debate here?

zip
Old 28th July 2005
  #235
Lives for gear
 
themaidsroom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zippernoize
This statement contradicts itself. How could the CD reveal how great the analog tape is if it can't reproduce the sound?
zip
one captures - one stores .......i'm working so i can't say more - but
that statement says it all one captures - one stores
the cd reveals tapes depth - this is not a contradiction


- jack
Old 29th July 2005
  #236
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zippernoize
If I understand Johnny B correctly, he has a problem with A/D D/A converters.

Johnny B, if your problem is with the conversion stage, are you implying that once convertion is improved, digital audio has the potential to sound good?
Answers:

Yes, I have a big problem with the converters. I blame the Digital Math Scoundrels at the chip makers for those problems.

Yes, I have a big problem with the existing formats. Both CD and MPfreakin3 (less so with SACD) but again I blame the Digital Math Scoundrels for all those problems.

Yes, I have a problem even with DSP.

Yes, I have problems with the filters and the aliasing, and the truncation, and the rounding erorrs and all the other f**king "anomalies" that all contribute to making digital sound like trash when compared to great analogue. Lots of engineers (mostly the non-audio type) and Digital Math Scoundrels are to blame for all this crap.

Do I believe it just MIGHT BE possible for digital sound quality to improve?

Yes, but first, all the old tired Math Scoundrels and all their current failures must be tossed out into the garbage like the bad trash they have sold using fraud and damned lies.

I say punish the bastard Math Scoundrels for the sorry state of digital Sound Quality...they have told too many big lies...they have gotten fat off those lies...they still produce trashy little cold sounding silicon wafers that sound as thin as they are physically.

Drive those Big Semi-Trucks or Urban Assault Vehicles over all those ****ty boxes that have these ****ty sound chips in them. And make those prickhead Digital Math Scoundrels make full restitution by way of a huge Class Action Lawsuit.

For digital to ever come close to being done properly, you cannot stick band-aides on the failed tech of the past, you need entirely new tech.

New formats. New chips. New A-to-D and D-to-A processes.

And kick those Digital Math Scoundrels responsible for the current **** right out the God damn door to the freakin' curb.

Screw Nyquist and the dam horse he rode in on, CD and 16-bits @ 44.1K is "all you'll ever need " according to the Nyquist lemmings. Send these jerks back to the freakin' Phone Company were they all came from. These propellerheaded pricks all have **** for ears.

They all hear with their God damn eyes...but if they'd take the cotton out of their freakin' ears, quit trying to prove their dumb position with math, shut the f**k up, and actually listen, they would have to agree that digital's sound quality still sucks when compared to great analogue.

Nope, time for a change. Time to admit that Nyquist ain't God, time to admit the failure of his followers, time to move on with something that will superceed the current digital ****, which, BTW, was all obsolete on the day it was designed.

The Digital Math Scoundrels all need a damn good ass-kickin'.

Maybe we could send them all to Iraq or Gitmo and torture the lyin' jerks.

Always remember:

"Math is the last refuge of scoundrels."
Old 29th July 2005
  #237
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

careful johnny... dont be raising your blood pressure like that. could kill you. then who woudl we have to hate around here?


magnetic tape=distorted mush
digital bits=accurate representation


i have listened to both and used both. i prefer digital tracks, i can pick them out easily... and no one is claiming even the most tin ear cant hear a difference. its the intent and use of the medium which matters.
Old 29th July 2005
  #238
Lives for gear
 
Johnny B's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphajerk
digital bits=accurate representation
Hmmm, that's pretty bold talk for a even a no-eared fat man.

You may have ears attached and may not be fat...still..

"Accurate?" my ass.

Digital is full of errors and "anomalies" that make Digital Sound Quality sound like ****...
Old 29th July 2005
  #239
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

no, it sounds a LOT more like what is going in than analog does imparting mushy and hissy "flavor" to the track.

fat man? i take it you have never met me.... i have been called a lot of things but fat isnt one of them.
Old 29th July 2005
  #240
Lives for gear
 
Jose Mrochek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny B

Everything digital is obsolete on the day it was designed.
Signature anyone ??

very cool line.
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump