Tell Me :
Talk
My pleasure. Assisting kids to become great, self assured, thinking, creative, happy adults, anyway I can, is good.
Hello,
please do inform yourself better before posting:
[217.91.44.153]
Regards.
Cheers
I was driving home early Sunday morning through Bakersfield...
Actually, the question is incorrect. Digital is not better or worse than analog. Both have benefits and downsides. Both have fundamental errors -digital has a limited maximum dynamic range (limited by the sample rate), analog has high noise levels for example.
These days, digital recordings sound better than analog recordings when played on the right equipment. The improvement mainly is in the digital converters available -when old analog masters where transferred to digital in the '80's the converters where crap so the sound as end result was much less than a vinyl record. These days the converters are much better, and you do not loose any information anymore when converting.
Also important is the sound equipment you play the music on -analog requires different systems than digital. We tend to play digital music over cheap systems like computer soundcards, Ipods and whatever, and the music played is mostly in dreadful formats like mp3.
You state Wicki wasn’t of any help, but I find this article clear and rather good.
[en.wikipedia.org]
Mathijs
Memphis, here's a thought: pick up a BOOK.
Sites are great, but try to instill the full power of the library in her.
I got freakin' tired of my kid doing all her "research" online. Digital's
great but it too has limits. Just as with audio, some things analog does
better. Can't rewrite THAT book.
Totally agree with you on the playback systems, good point.
Small correction, "Dynamic Range" is a function of the bit depth, not the sample rate. 16 bit is fair and 24-bit is good enough.
The "Frequency Response" is what is determined by sample rate. ie) 20Hz-22KHz
44.1kHz is fair, 48kHz is better and 96Khz is good enough.
If you use 24-bit, 96Khz digital recording settings, the dynamic range and frequencies that a human ear can hear are all theoretically reproduced.
The very best mastering systems these days use 32-bit floating, 192kHz sample rate converters. The 192kHz being a bit of overkill imho. peace
That's what the book publisher's and sellers are telling us too. I could imagine a place on the web where books were just as accurate, original and maybe even tactile with the right digital tablet. Kind of what google was/is trying to do. Seems they jumped the gun in terms of not getting their (copyright, etal) ducks lined up and sorted prior to the big Data Scan/input phase.
Book are indeed a friend to me, but to my kids, kids, kids in the future, maybe not. just thinkin... peace
Books are best. period. Pass the word.
Books can not be "edited" to fit the CPCO (Current Politically Correct Opinions).
e.g. What they did to Mark Twain's book last year. Once they(someone) start deciding and what is appropriate and what is inappropriate... where does it stop?
Cheers guys! Happy Friday! Time to rock out!
You're BATMAN!
No, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
nice rebuff!
Cheers
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
memphiscats
()
Date: March 23, 2012 03:12
Excellent info, Max's...ta very much!Quote
Max'sKansasCity
My only itentions are only to make things better, do or not do, that is a parents decision, but if this was one of my nephews.... I would be suggesting to them.....
Dont stop at one message. I dont know when the project is due..... but she should call everyday, making it more and more urgent with each heart felt call, always being very nice, never acting(or thinking) that Jack owes anything... while working on the project in the mean time.
I would suggest.... why the heck not call?.... and if nothing happens... she gave it her best effort... and on the final call, if nothing happened.... leave a kind, happy final message that she did the project on her own, and although it would have been nice to have an expert like Jack White adding input, she understands if he is too busy to help her out, thanks anyway... and if Jack ever wants to hear her take on analog versus digital, Jack can feel free to call YOU and the two of you might consider it... if you are not too busy. There was no failure, there was trying to make something where there was nothing..... do something... the effort can be its own reward... there is no possible "failure"... it just didnt work this time
And anytime somthing like this comes up again...
do it all again... and sooner or later "things will happen"...
the harder one works... the "luckier" one seems to be.
I firmly believe Jack must have some kind of packet or prefab presentation about this stuff which they love to send out.... it seems to be a corner stone of Jack White's record label.... analog music.
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: March 23, 2012 03:24
Quote
memphiscats
Excellent info, Max's...ta very much!
My pleasure. Assisting kids to become great, self assured, thinking, creative, happy adults, anyway I can, is good.
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
marquess
()
Date: March 23, 2012 03:41
Quote
liddas
To start, it is not necessarily true that analog is better than digital.
What I find funny is that in this era of LP reanissance, they (re)print mostly rock and jazz LP, but hardly any classic music works. I asked why, and the answer was, nobody wants them.
In my experience, today a high resolution music file can sound better than the same product in LP. But an LP is a "degradation" of the analog master (when the master is analog), so I do not know how the analog master compares to the high resolution digital counterpart.
C
Hello,
please do inform yourself better before posting:
[217.91.44.153]
Regards.
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Laughingsam
()
Date: March 23, 2012 04:31
Erik’s mentioning the shape of the waves – with analog being more rounded, general, and to some ears “naturally” shaped and digital being more jagged, precise, and at times “artificially” shaped – is what I would use to frame the paper. After that, she can get into some of the ways in which these 2 mediums intersect each other during the recording and sound mastering processes, such as the CLASP system that Max mentioned or the analog-modeled processing that gets applied when we use digital processing software like wave editors, plugin processors, and the like.
As far as reproducing sound, neither digital nor analog holds an absolute advantage. Getting the best sound is about aligning frequencies to obtain an optimal delivery. Whether it’s done by analog, digital, or both means matters less than how the frequencies are aligned, which primarily depends upon how the sound is recorded and then how the sound is mixed afterwards.
As far as storing sound, digital holds the obvious advantage because it doesn’t experience degradation.
You mentioned that your daughter’s class isn’t an “adult” class. I’d just keep it simple and stick to the principles above (and previously mentioned by Max & Erik).
As far as reproducing sound, neither digital nor analog holds an absolute advantage. Getting the best sound is about aligning frequencies to obtain an optimal delivery. Whether it’s done by analog, digital, or both means matters less than how the frequencies are aligned, which primarily depends upon how the sound is recorded and then how the sound is mixed afterwards.
As far as storing sound, digital holds the obvious advantage because it doesn’t experience degradation.
You mentioned that your daughter’s class isn’t an “adult” class. I’d just keep it simple and stick to the principles above (and previously mentioned by Max & Erik).
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
memphiscats
()
Date: March 23, 2012 04:52
Many thanks to y'all. All content & links are greatly appreciated.Quote
Laughingsam
Erik’s mentioning the shape of the waves – with analog being more rounded, general, and to some ears “naturally” shaped and digital being more jagged, precise, and at times “artificially” shaped – is what I would use to frame the paper. After that, she can get into some of the ways in which these 2 mediums intersect each other during the recording and sound mastering processes, such as the CLASP system that Max mentioned or the analog-modeled processing that gets applied when we use digital processing software like wave editors, plugin processors, and the like.
As far as reproducing sound, neither digital nor analog holds an absolute advantage. Getting the best sound is about aligning frequencies to obtain an optimal delivery. Whether it’s done by analog, digital, or both means matters less than how the frequencies are aligned, which primarily depends upon how the sound is recorded and then how the sound is mixed afterwards.
As far as storing sound, digital holds the obvious advantage because it doesn’t experience degradation.
You mentioned that your daughter’s class isn’t an “adult” class. I’d just keep it simple and stick to the principles above (and previously mentioned by Max & Erik).
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Title5Take1
()
Date: March 23, 2012 05:32
A lesson in how much it may actually matter:
I read an interview with a top DJ (who does DJ gigs at parties in S. Calif.) who mentioned visiting other DJ's doing party gigs. The hosts will have requested these DJ's play all vinyl. The interviewed DJ said, "These DJ's will have vinyl spinning on a turntable. A big crowd is grooving to the music. And then I'll go behind the desk—a DJ visiting a DJ—and these DJ's often point to an iPod that's hidden under the desk and tell me: `Don't tell the hosts that the music is actually blasting from this iPod.'"
I read an interview with a top DJ (who does DJ gigs at parties in S. Calif.) who mentioned visiting other DJ's doing party gigs. The hosts will have requested these DJ's play all vinyl. The interviewed DJ said, "These DJ's will have vinyl spinning on a turntable. A big crowd is grooving to the music. And then I'll go behind the desk—a DJ visiting a DJ—and these DJ's often point to an iPod that's hidden under the desk and tell me: `Don't tell the hosts that the music is actually blasting from this iPod.'"
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: March 23, 2012 06:04
Hey MCats, Its ALL analog when you are listening back. There is NO digital music per se. Once you come from the system output to the speakers and then to your brain...IT"S ALL ANALOG.
What happens inside the black box may be digital (recording and processing) but it all starts out as sound pressure waves from the instruments (analog) and ends up as sound pressure waves from the speakers (analog).
With the exception of some drum sounds and some Bass guitar sounds I doubt anyone on this board could actually hear the difference between a sound processed digitally or in analog with today's technology. Except you'd probably hear more hiss and noise on the analog sound.
Inside the machines analog is just voltage levels which correspond to the level and content of the sound. Digital inside the machines for a song is millions of occurances one of only two voltages (o volts- 0 , say 5V = 1). Two states , off=0, ON=1.
So to represent music A CD has 705,600 of these states in every SECOND of music.
Don't sweat the details, Analog has it's place in pro recording studios and vinyl record buffs but digital has so many practical advantages you are not going to avoid it in this world.
I always laugh my ass off when I see a set of Hi fidelity speakers with advertise "digital ready" or some crap. Its a lie. Uless the speaker has a digital input (AES for instance) it is strictly an analog device.
I could go into great detail but won't cause I'm boring myself here. I once designed digitally controilled analog mixing consoles for high end music and film studios , so I appreciate the benefits of an analog signal path, it just makes such little sense these days when side by side blind listening tests are done. Even the pro's pick digital half the time. Truly.
Now there may be some "emotional" factors which are not present with digital but that's another post for me. ie) Neil Young says when his shrink switched the background music in his therapy sessions to CD's from vinyl he clammed up. It might just be a joke though with him. Let you own ears decide is my best advice.
Bottom line analog adds something to the music which us humans seem to like but digital will reproduce it EXACTLY like it was made. Nothing wrong with that. peace
What happens inside the black box may be digital (recording and processing) but it all starts out as sound pressure waves from the instruments (analog) and ends up as sound pressure waves from the speakers (analog).
With the exception of some drum sounds and some Bass guitar sounds I doubt anyone on this board could actually hear the difference between a sound processed digitally or in analog with today's technology. Except you'd probably hear more hiss and noise on the analog sound.
Inside the machines analog is just voltage levels which correspond to the level and content of the sound. Digital inside the machines for a song is millions of occurances one of only two voltages (o volts- 0 , say 5V = 1). Two states , off=0, ON=1.
So to represent music A CD has 705,600 of these states in every SECOND of music.
Don't sweat the details, Analog has it's place in pro recording studios and vinyl record buffs but digital has so many practical advantages you are not going to avoid it in this world.
I always laugh my ass off when I see a set of Hi fidelity speakers with advertise "digital ready" or some crap. Its a lie. Uless the speaker has a digital input (AES for instance) it is strictly an analog device.
I could go into great detail but won't cause I'm boring myself here. I once designed digitally controilled analog mixing consoles for high end music and film studios , so I appreciate the benefits of an analog signal path, it just makes such little sense these days when side by side blind listening tests are done. Even the pro's pick digital half the time. Truly.
Now there may be some "emotional" factors which are not present with digital but that's another post for me. ie) Neil Young says when his shrink switched the background music in his therapy sessions to CD's from vinyl he clammed up. It might just be a joke though with him. Let you own ears decide is my best advice.
Bottom line analog adds something to the music which us humans seem to like but digital will reproduce it EXACTLY like it was made. Nothing wrong with that. peace
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
memphiscats
()
Date: March 23, 2012 06:37
Thank you - this is very interesting. You'll never bore me!Quote
Naturalust
Hey MCats, Its ALL analog when you are listening back. There is NO digital music per se. Once you come from the system output to the speakers and then to your brain...IT"S ALL ANALOG.
What happens inside the black box may be digital (recording and processing) but it all starts out as sound pressure waves from the instruments (analog) and ends up as sound pressure waves from the speakers (analog).
With the exception of some drum sounds and some Bass guitar sounds I doubt anyone on this board could actually hear the difference between a sound processed digitally or in analog with today's technology. Except you'd probably hear more hiss and noise on the analog sound.
Inside the machines analog is just voltage levels which correspond to the level and content of the sound. Digital inside the machines for a song is millions of occurances one of only two voltages (o volts- 0 , say 5V = 1). Two states , off=0, ON=1.
So to represent music A CD has 705,600 of these states in every SECOND of music.
Don't sweat the details, Analog has it's place in pro recording studios and vinyl record buffs but digital has so many practical advantages you are not going to avoid it in this world.
I always laugh my ass off when I see a set of Hi fidelity speakers with advertise "digital ready" or some crap. Its a lie. Uless the speaker has a digital input (AES for instance) it is strictly an analog device.
I could go into great detail but won't cause I'm boring myself here. I once designed digitally controilled analog mixing consoles for high end music and film studios , so I appreciate the benefits of an analog signal path, it just makes such little sense these days when side by side blind listening tests are done. Even the pro's pick digital half the time. Truly.
Now there may be some "emotional" factors which are not present with digital but that's another post for me. ie) Neil Young says when his shrink switched the background music in his therapy sessions to CD's from vinyl he clammed up. It might just be a joke though with him. Let you own ears decide is my best advice.
Bottom line analog adds something to the music which us humans seem to like but digital will reproduce it EXACTLY like it was made. Nothing wrong with that. peace
Cheers
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: March 23, 2012 08:14
I was driving home early Sunday morning through Bakersfield...
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: March 23, 2012 11:32
Quote
memphiscats
Hope you might help me...
My daughter is doing a project for science re these two mediums. We've checked Wicki & a couple of other sites. Perhaps those of you who are musicians, or anyone who is has a tuned-in ear can better explain WHY analog is better sounding when listening to music? My feeling/understanding is that analog is a truer "record" of sound you hear.
Thanks very much for any info and/or links.
Cheers,
M
p.s. I did a search on IORR to see if I could find a similar thread posted...nothing came up for analog vs. digital but many, many threads came up when I used ALL WORDS. So please feel free to point me to another thread if this topic was already discussed.
Actually, the question is incorrect. Digital is not better or worse than analog. Both have benefits and downsides. Both have fundamental errors -digital has a limited maximum dynamic range (limited by the sample rate), analog has high noise levels for example.
These days, digital recordings sound better than analog recordings when played on the right equipment. The improvement mainly is in the digital converters available -when old analog masters where transferred to digital in the '80's the converters where crap so the sound as end result was much less than a vinyl record. These days the converters are much better, and you do not loose any information anymore when converting.
Also important is the sound equipment you play the music on -analog requires different systems than digital. We tend to play digital music over cheap systems like computer soundcards, Ipods and whatever, and the music played is mostly in dreadful formats like mp3.
You state Wicki wasn’t of any help, but I find this article clear and rather good.
[en.wikipedia.org]
Mathijs
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
TheDailyBuzzherd
()
Date: March 23, 2012 18:39
Quote
memphiscats
Hope you might help me...
My daughter is doing a project for science re these two mediums. We've checked Wicki & a couple of other sites.
Memphis, here's a thought: pick up a BOOK.
Sites are great, but try to instill the full power of the library in her.
I got freakin' tired of my kid doing all her "research" online. Digital's
great but it too has limits. Just as with audio, some things analog does
better. Can't rewrite THAT book.
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: March 23, 2012 19:31
Quote
Mathijs
Actually, the question is incorrect. Digital is not better or worse than analog. Both have benefits and downsides. Both have fundamental errors -digital has a limited maximum dynamic range (limited by the sample rate), analog has high noise levels for example.
These days, digital recordings sound better than analog recordings when played on the right equipment. The improvement mainly is in the digital converters available -when old analog masters where transferred to digital in the '80's the converters where crap so the sound as end result was much less than a vinyl record. These days the converters are much better, and you do not loose any information anymore when converting.
Also important is the sound equipment you play the music on -analog requires different systems than digital. We tend to play digital music over cheap systems like computer soundcards, Ipods and whatever, and the music played is mostly in dreadful formats like mp3.
Mathijs
Totally agree with you on the playback systems, good point.
Small correction, "Dynamic Range" is a function of the bit depth, not the sample rate. 16 bit is fair and 24-bit is good enough.
The "Frequency Response" is what is determined by sample rate. ie) 20Hz-22KHz
44.1kHz is fair, 48kHz is better and 96Khz is good enough.
If you use 24-bit, 96Khz digital recording settings, the dynamic range and frequencies that a human ear can hear are all theoretically reproduced.
The very best mastering systems these days use 32-bit floating, 192kHz sample rate converters. The 192kHz being a bit of overkill imho. peace
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
memphiscats
()
Date: March 23, 2012 20:32
Thanks again for all of the help & encouragement.
YES - we use the web to just get started - not to do the whole job - BOOKS are our friends
RE: The Wiki - yes there were some good points in the "main differences" section. However, trying to find them buried in this convoluted & sluggish piece was challenging - at best. I realize part of research is to sift through content, but this Wiki entry needs a strong machete (or at least some root-kill) to cut through the high-tech buzz words, run-on sentences, and odd syntax.
Cheers & TGIF
YES - we use the web to just get started - not to do the whole job - BOOKS are our friends
RE: The Wiki - yes there were some good points in the "main differences" section. However, trying to find them buried in this convoluted & sluggish piece was challenging - at best. I realize part of research is to sift through content, but this Wiki entry needs a strong machete (or at least some root-kill) to cut through the high-tech buzz words, run-on sentences, and odd syntax.
Cheers & TGIF
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: March 23, 2012 23:16
Quote
memphiscats
Thanks again for all of the help & encouragement.
YES - we use the web to just get started - not to do the whole job - BOOKS are our friends
)
That's what the book publisher's and sellers are telling us too. I could imagine a place on the web where books were just as accurate, original and maybe even tactile with the right digital tablet. Kind of what google was/is trying to do. Seems they jumped the gun in terms of not getting their (copyright, etal) ducks lined up and sorted prior to the big Data Scan/input phase.
Book are indeed a friend to me, but to my kids, kids, kids in the future, maybe not. just thinkin... peace
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: March 23, 2012 23:24
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
memphiscats
Thanks again for all of the help & encouragement.
YES - we use the web to just get started - not to do the whole job - BOOKS are our friends
)
That's what the book publisher's and sellers are telling us too. I could imagine a place on the web where books were just as accurate, original and maybe even tactile with the right digital tablet. Kind of what google was/is trying to do. Seems they jumped the gun in terms of not getting their (copyright, etal) ducks lined up and sorted prior to the big Data Scan/input phase.
Book are indeed a friend to me, but to my kids, kids, kids in the future, maybe not. just thinkin... peace
Books are best. period. Pass the word.
Books can not be "edited" to fit the CPCO (Current Politically Correct Opinions).
e.g. What they did to Mark Twain's book last year. Once they(someone) start deciding and what is appropriate and what is inappropriate... where does it stop?
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
memphiscats
()
Date: March 23, 2012 23:45
Agreed - books should not be censored for any reason - least of all for PC crap! RE: In terms of seeing books, in full tactile fashion online...that's basically what I do for a living...but at the end of the day, I can't wait to turn off my computer and pick up PRINT COPY. I will say the only device that I like to read on is my (really big) Kindle. But even with that, I miss the touch, smell, the flipping-through.Quote
Max'sKansasCity
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
memphiscats
Thanks again for all of the help & encouragement.
YES - we use the web to just get started - not to do the whole job - BOOKS are our friends
)
That's what the book publisher's and sellers are telling us too. I could imagine a place on the web where books were just as accurate, original and maybe even tactile with the right digital tablet. Kind of what google was/is trying to do. Seems they jumped the gun in terms of not getting their (copyright, etal) ducks lined up and sorted prior to the big Data Scan/input phase.
Book are indeed a friend to me, but to my kids, kids, kids in the future, maybe not. just thinkin... peace
Books are best. period. Pass the word.
Books can not be "edited" to fit the CPCO (Current Politically Correct Opinions).
e.g. What they did to Mark Twain's book last year. Once they(someone) start deciding and what is appropriate and what is inappropriate... where does it stop?
Cheers guys! Happy Friday! Time to rock out!
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: March 24, 2012 01:21
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
Quote
memphiscats
Excellent info, Max's...ta very much!
My pleasure. Assisting kids to become great, self assured, thinking, creative, happy adults, anyway I can, is good.
You're BATMAN!
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: March 24, 2012 02:14
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
Quote
memphiscats
Excellent info, Max's...ta very much!
My pleasure. Assisting kids to become great, self assured, thinking, creative, happy adults, anyway I can, is good.
You're BATMAN!
No, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
memphiscats
()
Date: March 24, 2012 02:37
LOLQuote
Max'sKansasCity
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
Quote
memphiscats
Excellent info, Max's...ta very much!
My pleasure. Assisting kids to become great, self assured, thinking, creative, happy adults, anyway I can, is good.
You're BATMAN!
No, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: March 24, 2012 03:14
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
Quote
memphiscats
Excellent info, Max's...ta very much!
My pleasure. Assisting kids to become great, self assured, thinking, creative, happy adults, anyway I can, is good.
You're BATMAN!
No, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
nice rebuff!
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
yorkey
()
Date: March 26, 2012 13:32
Has Jack replied yet? :-)
You got the Sun, You got the Moon,
and you've got
The Rolling Stones
You got the Sun, You got the Moon,
and you've got
The Rolling Stones
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
memphiscats
()
Date: March 26, 2012 17:29
Not yet but I haven't checked my inbox today!Quote
yorkey
Has Jack replied yet? :-)
Cheers
Re: OT. Analog vs. Digital...HELP
Posted by:
marquess
()
Date: March 26, 2012 20:09
a nice link:
[www.dailymail.co.uk]
I have at home 3 ways of listening to music:
LP
CD
MP3
They are all connected to the same amplifying system (QUAD tube system).
By far, the best sounding is the analog, LP.
That is a fact.
Cheers!
[www.dailymail.co.uk]
I have at home 3 ways of listening to music:
LP
CD
MP3
They are all connected to the same amplifying system (QUAD tube system).
By far, the best sounding is the analog, LP.
That is a fact.
Cheers!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
atip , DandelionPowderman , Deathgod , desertblues68 , filoca , flairville , Jack-flash , keefriffhard4life , moosman , rollingknokke , sabata , saltoftheearth , schillid , Silver Dagger , stonesmuziekfan , strettonbull , TE , thedudette
Guests:
186
Record Number of Users:
48
on June 19, 2013 06:16
Record Number of Guests:
246
on June 19, 2013 05:47
