Digital Drive

RE: he's not completely wrong ...

72.86.137.210

This Post Has Been Edited by the Author

In Reply to: RE: he's not completely wrong ... posted by rick_m on March 13, 2012 at 13:59:43

Rick wrote: "Of course it's possible since it's proven."
Which is my point. If one truly good sounding CD exists. By which I mean, with great dynamics, full and flat frequency response, low distortion, noise, - the objective qualities. Yet without glare, aural fatigue, and a general lack of sounding natural - the subjective qualities. Then, many more such good sounding CDs should exist than actually seem to.
While those various analog formats you mentioned have had variation in sound quality, such variations revolved around the objective qualities, for which, CD has always excelled. They have not suffered from the same subjective problems which has seemed unique to CD. Since most (but not all) of the early CD releases were recorded and mastered on the same studio equipment as were the analog formats, the problems with CD are not likely attributeable to those factors. It seems obvious that the problems were/are digital domain in origin, which once isolated and corrected, should be possible to consistently and repeatedly eliminate (for digital processing is fundamentally consistent and repeatable) across most production/mastering chains.
I should probably add that I'm not some kind of digital Luddite. I have designed my own audio DACs for the purpose of experimentation. While I hold undergraduate degrees in both electronic engineering and computer science, I also hold a pair of ears and (continue to) hear the subjective problems of CD sound, despite the existence of too few natural sounding comtemporary CDs.
_
Ken Newton

Edits: 03/14/12 03/14/12 03/14/12 03/14/12 03/14/12

Follow Ups: