Frank, Frank, its those bunny ears, they distort the heck out of the
sound, although they do pretty good picking up sounds imperceptible to
the human ear <vbg>.
rg
frank theriault wrote:
A couple of thoughts, and then that's it for me on this most OT of threads:
First, I don't give a rat's ass about what engineers say, what numbers
say, what theory says.
I listen to music. My ears decide what sounds best, not numbers or
theory. No, I'm not an engineer or a scientist, I don't know any theory
at all. But, I know what I hear.
I have a pretty decent CD playback system. Not high end or audiophile,
but better than most people have. It sounds pretty good.
I had (before a CD rack fell on it and bent the tonearm - how's that for
irony!!) a pretty good vinyl playback system. Not audiophile, but
better than most. It would always amaze me.
There was a certain "punch" and portrayal of dynamics that I heard from
vinyl that my CD's weren't able to reproduce. There was a much better
soundstage, better space between the instruments that I couldn't hear on
my CD's.
Am I saying that vinyl or analogue is always better than digital?
Nope. Just that in my system, vinyl was better. It did wear faster, so
I didn't play it all that often.
Point two: CD's are deteriorating at a much faster rate than experts
predicted. Some are unplayable, as the little pits that the laser reads
are becoming craters, and therefore unreadable. Experts don't know why,
but improper manufacturing techniques may be to blame - whatever, it's
happening regardless of whether the CD's are even played or not.
I agree with JCO with his comment on analogue master tapes. I've got
some CD's made from old jazz masters (Rudy Van Geller rereleases) that
are quite astounding for 40 and 45 year old tapes.
cheers,
frank
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: 35 vs digi - Some points to ponder.
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:17:04 -0400
EVER heard of better sound? I never said ANALOG tape
recording is perfect, it isnt, neither is digtial.
But the really high end analog recordings are much better
than most digital recordings in existance. The number
of musical master recordings made at 24/196k is still
miniscule. Most are 16bit/48K from about 1980 to 1995.
Regarding shedding, Steve Hoffman, one of the worlds
most respected mastering engineers ( he does both
analog LP cuttings and digital CD/DVD/SACD) claims
that nearly every vintage analog master tape he
has ever worked with is in EXCELLENT to LIKE NEW condtion.
He claims that analog tape degradation is a myth.
_________________________________________________________________
Take advantage of powerful junk e-mail filters built on patented
Microsoft� SmartScreen Technology.
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN� Premium right now and get the
first two months FREE*.
