Digital vs Audio Formats in Music

[cleonjr]

it is a secret.if you look hard enough you will get some clues.

ok i gotta go to bed my dad will kick my can if he sees me still up see yall tomorrow

 

[Pandovski]

 

[robgmn]

Methinks Cleon must be a child prodigy industry-insider (like that 12-year-old who teaches Arduino classes at MIT).

I wait with baited breath (baited with Morgan and Coke)...

 

[Pandovski]

Methinks Cleon has AK as his browser start page.

 

[river25]

What is going to replace digital, please tell me more?

Must be quantum mechanics. Quantum audionics????

You will hear every note of every song simulataneously!

 

[E-Stat]

Technically that is impossible. One has to be the better one.

When the question is the bandwidth limited Redbook standard vs.analog, each has its advantages. Only when digital gets enough bandwidth to eliminate the unavoidable compromises between high frequency response and phase integrity, does one format truly rise above.

I find that 24/96 gets there. The arbitrary CD-ROM storage capacity based standard of three decades ago just doesn't get it, regardless of mastering differences.

 

[Pandovski]

When the question is the bandwidth limited Redbook standard vs.analog, each has its advantages. Only when digital gets enough bandwidth to eliminate the unavoidable compromises between high frequency response and phase integrity, does one format truly rise above.

I find that 24/96 gets there. The arbitrary CD-ROM storage capacity based standard of three decades ago just doesn't get it, regardless of mastering differences.

Because Redbook is 20Hz to 20kHz there is loss of phase integrity? Can you explain us a bit more on this? Thanks. :wave:

 

[Dockerboy]

I'm a newbie here and 1st off I want to say I'm loving the info and views on here

Got my first tube amp about 6 weeks ago, around mid-shelf for a guy of my means, anyway before that been using the B&W Zepellin Air and sometimes my HT system (Arcam DrDock-Onkyo amp-Mirage speakers) to play my 320kbps files

Since I've had the TA I have rolled out the KT88's for cryo'd KT120's
10 days ago got the Oppo-105, so I could hear what all the fuss of Flac was about
this morning the Mullard 12AU7 CV4003's cryo'd from Upscale Audio arrived, going through my Flac files as I write,
Every upgrade is heading in the direction I want, I know there are vinyl rigs out there that will sound better, but for me this is getting heavenly
Just waiting on some Silver Lace interconnects from HomeGrown

Who knows where the digital revolution is taking us, I know one thing though I'll be along for the ride
And to think this all started by listening to my daughters Ipod Mini on our front porch that day back in 2005

 

[4-2-7]

Opinions everybody has one as I do. There is a reason I have reverted back to analog formats.

Audio, Sound
Still Imaging
Motion Pictures

My opinion is that "Digital" computer generated manipulation is destroying reality. Do you want to have a face to face conversation with someone, all the while knowing they are manipulated? A fake to appear more pleasing. Humans are imperfect but thats ok at lest they are real with feelings and soul. Something that a computer can not duplicate.

Sometimes I wish the industry would just produce something real. Why are we being fed a new reality daily generated by computers? Because we can doesn't make it right or good.

Most of the movies today are totally over the top CGI
Most of the still imaging today are totally over the top Photo Shopped
Most of the music today is over the top manipulated digitally enhanced

I would rather hear my old records with surface noise. The crackle pop of a bit of dust is not as annoying as a hacking of the originality of the track. Thats if they felt the track was worth digitizing in the first place. So much music out there that is not nor will be brought to the digital realm.

 

[cleonjr]

Opinions everybody has one as I do. There is a reason I have reverted back to analog formats.

Audio, Sound
Still Imaging
Motion Pictures

My opinion is that "Digital" computer generated manipulation is destroying reality. Do you want to have a face to face conversation with someone, all the while knowing they are manipulated? A fake to appear more pleasing. Humans are imperfect but thats ok at lest they are real with feelings and soul. Something that a computer can not duplicate.

Sometimes I wish the industry would just produce something real. Why are we being fed a new reality daily generated by computers? Because we can doesn't make it right or good.

Most of the movies today are totally over the top CGI
Most of the still imaging today are totally over the top Photo Shopped
Most of the music today is over the top manipulated digitally enhanced

I would rather hear my old records with surface noise. The crackle pop of a bit of dust is not as annoying as a hacking of the originality of the track. Thats if they felt the track was worth digitizing in the first place. So much music out there that is not nor will be brought to the digital realm.

ok i am back to tell you the tell,, but first things first,

4-2-7, you are so close to seeing the downfall of the present technology,we could not even be having this conversation if not for the digital realm.it overshadows everything we do from imaging to sound even controlling our automobiles.any one can be a professional photog now thanks to digital.

ok you can ponder on that for a while.i need to get my compose together and catch up on answering the rest of the posts. i will say though i like analog and digital i have tube amps for my guitars and vintage amps for my music as well as modern digital examples.and like them all equally.

 

[hjames]

even as we speak digital is on it's way out.

Hardly - I can't imagine what you would produce to support such a statement!

Just because some audiophiles have reverted (that means stepped backward to a previous practice)
to analog media doesn't mean the industry or the mainstream has.

 

[cleonjr]

Methinks Cleon must be a child prodigy industry-insider (like that 12-year-old who teaches Arduino classes at MIT).

I wait with baited breath (baited with Morgan and Coke)...

robgnm,,no i am not a child prodigy, i dropped out of school in the 8th grade and i am pretty much self taught.as why i am so curious on AK knowledge is a blessing, as you all know ..ok for what you have been waiting for,,the new technology actualy it was thought of in '59 i will post a link at the end of this.

it has the possibility to rebuild all known theory's and uproot modern thinking at a level not thought of.it is not the known you have to fear it is what you dont know that will knock your concepts back to the stone age.i will not get into it any further i will post the link that gets you started on your quest for this knowledge.i am curious to some of the reactions.
http://crnano.org/whatis.htm

 

[cleonjr]

Hardly - I can't imagine what you would produce to support such a statement!

Just because some audiophiles have reverted (that means stepped backward to a previous practice)
to analog media doesn't mean the industry or the mainstream has.

the sky's the limit when it comes to man's creative and destructive thinking.

i am sure by now we all know that we are kept in the dark on a lot of innovations.from various trendsetters be it techno or whatever.there is a vast amount of money being spent to give us the perfect living enviroment.

 

[ofajen]

Which format does better in RECORDING - MASTERING - DISTRIBUTION - REPRODUCTION?

From the music to your ears. The whole 9 yards.

Thoughts?

For the most part, the production choice of recording to tape, digitally, or one of the many combinations of the two will be made based upon non-audio factors, such as whether the workflow constraints imposed by tape are helpful to the project or a hindrance, what folks are comfortable with and sometimes, cost.

There are a few specific tasks where there are audio differences of note:

Digital is superior for solo piano due to lack of wow and flutter and lower noise floor. Digital gets the low end down accurately, while tape will change things and that must be allowed for. Tape does loud guitars and drums right with less work.

We've reached a time where the mastering expertise and practice has mostly moved away from tape, other than as an option of delivery format for a mix tape.

Cheers,

Otto

 

[E-Stat]

Because Redbook is 20Hz to 20kHz there is loss of phase integrity? Can you explain us a bit more on this? Thanks. :wave:

First of all, consider that Redbook was never a "start from scratch clean design" to replace analog audio. It is a compromise fenced in by the storage limitation of the CD-ROM computer medium from thirty years ago. Only a fixed budget of data was available. Had the DVD-ROM been available then, the standard would be very different.

You can only achieve a flat 20hz to 20khz response when you introduce lots of ringing into the equation. I'll let Charles Hansen of Ayre explain:

For any filter (digital or analog) the sharper the corner

Any filter sharp enough...

Here's a white paper which discusses the topic in more detail.

The top end has always been where the CD format lacks the extension and natural harmonic content delivered by analog and hi-rez digital. The sound of live musical instruments that have significant harmonic content in the top octaves never sound lean or clinical as you find in the Redbook world.

I have several recordings in LP, CD and 24/96 versions. I find comparing the same music across multiple formats illuminating. While it is true that the mastering process factors into the result, I find consistent differences between the low and high resolution digital versions. For me, 24/96 combines the best of both analog and digital worlds.

 

[Pandovski]

First of all, consider that Redbook was never a "start from scratch clean design" to replace analog audio. It is a compromise fenced in by the storage limitation of the CD-ROM computer medium from thirty years ago. Only a fixed budget of data was available. Had the DVD-ROM been available then, the standard would be very different.

You can only achieve a flat 20hz to 20khz response when you introduce lots of ringing into the equation. I'll let Charles Hansen of Ayre explain:

For any filter (digital or analog) the sharper the corner

Any filter sharp enough...

Here's a white paper which discusses the topic in more detail.

The top end has always been where the CD format lacks the extension and natural harmonic content delivered by analog and hi-rez digital. The sound of live musical instruments that have significant harmonic content in the top octaves never sound lean or clinical as you find in the Redbook world.

I have several recordings in LP, CD and 24/96 versions. I find comparing the same music across multiple formats illuminating. While it is true that the mastering process factors into the result, I find consistent differences between the low and high resolution digital versions. For me, 24/96 combines the best of both analog and digital worlds.

OK. As I see this it has nothing to do with Redbook but digital filters in CDPs and data is from forum posts and manufacturer materials. It is hardware oriented. A more educational source on this topic IMO is Xiph.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM

You do realize very very very very very very little music has been recorded on anything beyond 16/44.1. What you buy as Hi-Res is upsampled Redbook. In recording studios 16/44.1 is considered Hi-Res. ECM, DECCA, DG all are focused around 16/44.1 and their editions sound perfect.

You find sharpness and ringing in 16/44.1? Do you realize the artifacts that are accompanied with tape and vinyl? And how lower resolution it is than 16 bits?

I hear no sharpness or ringing on a good CDP playing a well mastered CD. I must not be blessed with the golden ears.

 

[Dr Tinear]

First of all, consider that Redbook was never a "start from scratch clean design" to replace analog audio. It is a compromise fenced in by the storage limitation of the CD-ROM computer medium from thirty years ago. Only a fixed budget of data was available. Had the DVD-ROM been available then, the standard would be very different.

Your revisionist history is wrong. CD-ROM was an outgrowth of the CD-DA (Red Book) standard. The Yellow Book that defines CD-ROM was written by the same group of Philips and Sony engineers and published at the same time as the Red Book.

You can only achieve a flat 20hz to 20khz response when you introduce lots of ringing into the equation. I'll let Charles Hansen of Ayre explain:

For any filter (digital or analog) the sharper the corner

Any filter sharp enough...

Here's a white paper which discusses the topic in more detail.

The top end has always been where the CD format lacks the extension and natural harmonic content delivered by analog and hi-rez digital. The sound of live musical instruments that have significant harmonic content in the top octaves never sound lean or clinical as you find in the Redbook world.

I have several recordings in LP, CD and 24/96 versions. I find comparing the same music across multiple formats illuminating. While it is true that the mastering process factors into the result, I find consistent differences between the low and high resolution digital versions. For me, 24/96 combines the best of both analog and digital worlds.

I hear live instruments at least once a week when I play rehearsals or concerts, so I have no trouble recognizing colorations in recorded sound that give it a different character than live music. I don't hear a "lean or clinical" character in well-recorded Red Book CDs played back through a quality DAC. If your CDs don't sound as good as your LPs, you need a better CD player or DAC, or perhaps better recordings.

I've also heard higher-resolution digital formats -- both DVD-A and SACD -- played back on a high-end system. They sounded no better to me than well-produced CDs. I'm convinced that most of the hoopla over hi-res digital is misplaced and that better CD production standards in the studios would eliminate most of the griping about CD's alleged limitations.

 

[4-2-7]

ok i am back to tell you the tell,, but first things first,

4-2-7, you are so close to seeing the downfall of the present technology,we could not even be having this conversation if not for the digital realm.it overshadows everything we do from imaging to sound even controlling our automobiles.any one can be a professional photog now thanks to digital.

ok you can ponder on that for a while.i need to get my compose together and catch up on answering the rest of the posts. i will say though i like analog and digital i have tube amps for my guitars and vintage amps for my music as well as modern digital examples.and like them all equally.

Not "so close", vague maybe design for others to think.

Better can not be judged by frequency response or if it's just easier to produce,play and store.

Email is easier but what do we give up for it?

There is always a good and bad side of any aspect that we can look at.

Look just to the personal invasion of privacy and energy consumption in the digital realm.

Or we can look at a hand crank Victrola with the only information shared is between our own ears and the vinyl. With the energy consumption reserved to mans own straight.

 

[Pandovski]

16bit 44.1kHz digital audio in the professional recording industry is considered High Resolution. Everything analog is considered Low Resolution.

And yes, there is no Santa.

Pandovski, approximately 40% of the energy of a cymbal is above 20khz, although other instruments vary, including little above 20khz. Good article to read.

...

Besides that, ringing has deterioratious effects below 20khz, besides limiting the rise time, which can be detected by the ear to 1.5 microseconds (Jneutrons source), and 5microseconds (Us) by Dr. Kunchur's 5 year study and paper.

I can't hear beyond 20kHz.

With anything faster than 7mS (miliseconds) you can fool the ear and the brain. Ask any speaker designer.

 

[cleonjr]

a link to nanotubes sounds more like you have a jargon jag than anything -
I have yet to hear anything significant from your promise to explain "beyond digital" -
You are starting to sound like Romy the Cat's blue sky jabbers so far ...

i made no promise to explain this concept some wanted to know the so called new technology.which has yet to be public knowledge.i merely pointed out some. information i have gotten in my travels on the web.

know how this stuff is translated has nothing to do with me.and what you deem significant is all in your interpretation.i can remember when digital was considered voodoo science.

can we as responsible humans dispel things form a arrogant stance we like to take on something new. i merely wanted to share some knowledge i have ,to contribute to this thread about formats which for now are analog and digital.

i made no promise to explain this concept some wanted to know the so called new technology.which has yet to be public knowledge.i merely pointed out some. information i have gotten in my travels on the web.

know how this stuff is translated has nothing to do with me.and what you deem significant is all in your interpretation.i can remember when digital was considered voodoo science.

can we as responsible humans dispel things form a arrogant stance we like to take on something new. i merely wanted to share some knowledge i have ,to contribute to this thread about formats which for now are analog and digital.

"Kept in the dark" - that sounds like Tin foil cap rants ...

if you believe you are privy to new innovations and the powers that be let you in on the 411 that is cutting edge then you are slow to grasp modern living in general. life is a marketing strategy evolving minute by minute.



like the saying goes "he who has the gold ,makes the rules"

look at some of the mark levinson patents for proof that technology is changing,there is a major corporate battle going on right now to break out new tech.the European market is really stepping up to the occasion.

i dont really want to get too deep into this because it defracts from the op's main thread ,but you can continue on your own you might get some good info,it's out there.