You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
102 points
*

D/A and A/D | Digital Show and Tell (Monty Montgomery @ xiph.org)

This is a video about the digital vs analog audio quality debate. It explains, with examples, why analog audio within the accepted limits of human hearing (20 Hz to 20 kHz) can be reproduced with perfect fidelity using a 44.1 kHz 16 Bit digital signal.

There is no audible difference between an analog and digital audio signal.

Among other things, xiph.org maintains the .flac and .ogg vorbis audio formats - they know a little about audio encoding and reproduction.

permalink
report
reply
19 points

“they’re part of BIG DIGITAL!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It’s actually because of the limitations of analog media that analog audio might sound better. For example, you can’t compress the signal as much when mastering for vinyl instead of digital, since you risk the needle jumping between adjacent grooves. As a result, the vinyl version of a song can sound more dynamic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

It’s the opposite, no? Vinyl can’t handle the explosive dynamics common in modern music (especially electronic) due to the skipping issue, so any sharp peaks like that need to be compressed to make the overall mix more mellow

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I did a bit of reading and it seems you’re right, but it isn’t quite as simple. You have to compress more, since you have less potential dynamic range on vinyl (so in practice a digital recording can be more dynamic than an analog one), but limiting is more problematic and an excessively limited recording has to be cut quieter or you’ll encounter issues. From what I read, these issues seem to be mainly unintended distortion and, again, needle skipping.

But your explanation makes sense and I’m not quite sure why excessive limiting would lead to skipping.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

digital signals aren’t audible

permalink
report
parent
reply