In Reply to: Re: Not a debate .... posted by TBone on July 22, 2003 at 12:40:55:
"What i am talking about is practical dynamic capability with no respect to compression or expansion of the signal in the recording process. The lowest available detail in a analog signal is very low in volume - often below the noise floor of the tape hiss itself and often below the noise floor caused by the turntable itself."Turn table noise floor is at least 20dB lower than that of a good tape.
"With digital - there is nothing below the digital noise floor!!!"
This isn't exactly true.
If correct dither is applied there is more dynamic range.
Sony's SBM achievs almost 19 bit dynamic range in the most critical audio bandwidth with only 16 bits coding.So this 'true dynamic range' is nothing more than dynamic range in the normal meaning.
"Yet - that said - with analog the peaks dont show the same signs of compression as many digital products, indicating less distortion at peak gain."
This is complete nonsense. A good digital recording where the levels are set properly doesn't show compressed peaks.
"So you get more detail at the lowest volume, which gives you much greater depth and venue perception and yet - more detail at the highest peaks ... allowing the music to breath and grow in both volume and soundstage. "
You hear more detail because low level signals are amplified more than high level signals.
I like vinyl too, but I don't have to invent a new definition for dynamic range to 'proof' some sort of dynamic range superiority for vinyl playback.
It just isn't superiour.Of course a turntable can be engineered to be as quite as possible, and it will be very expensive too.
But vinyl replay will never be as quite as good digital equipment.Frank
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Not a debate .... - Frank. 13:05:34 07/22/03 (11)
- this is silly ... - TBone 13:23:47 07/22/03 (10)
- Re: this is silly ... - Frank. 13:50:50 07/22/03 (9)
- hmmmm .... - TBone 14:41:26 07/22/03 (8)
- Indeed... - Frank. 00:12:16 07/23/03 (5)
- Re: Indeed... - TBone 07:42:23 07/23/03 (4)
- Wrong again - Frank. 10:32:53 07/23/03 (3)
- yes ... indeed you are ... - TBone 13:07:01 07/23/03 (2)
- Re: yes ... indeed you are ... - Frank. 13:19:59 07/23/03 (1)
- Re: yes ... indeed you are ... - TBone 07:10:51 07/24/03 (0)
- you are lucky... - tunenut 16:01:14 07/22/03 (1)
- well ... - TBone 08:37:24 07/23/03 (0)