lonewhitefly
Active member
I remind you that it was you and VP that first starting talking down digital, not me talking down tape. My first statement was quite "fair and balanced" Reread page 1. Read my first post, VP's first post, your first post. Reread where OP asked for a "scientific study".
I'm not even sure if I should respond to this, as it's so wrong ...
Once again, the irony in your statements is outstanding.
Let's re-read page 1 together, as you suggested:
let's look at some quotes from you from page 1:
I don't understand the comment that vinyl sounds better at least with respect to high frequency information--it's noisy and distorted and not in a good way.
Digital generally can do a much better job of low-frequency accuracy
Can vinyl "move air" with the cannon blasts the way digital can? I don't think so, the needle would go shooting off into the air! What is the frequency response of tape at say 3Hz? Cause I can get a mic with response that low, and I can record that digitally
quotes from me from page 1:
(in response to: "I'm not sure what you're asking. Digital can pretty much sound exactly like analog.")not true.
and:
All sound coming through speakers is ultimately analog (speakers are analog) ... I suspect you might think more air is moving because vinyl records usually have more low-end than CDs ... this is not something inherent to the medium, but rather due to mastering decisions and processing limitations. And if you're listening to primarly records pressed from the '50s-'80s, then they probably have more evidence of tape head-bump (low end boost).
my take on 'vinyl sounds better' is ...
A master tape sounds much better than a CD dub of the master. period. I don't think there's any comparison.
A master tape sounds much better than a vinyl dub of the master. (again, no comparison)
A CD of the master tape sounds superficially more accurate (i.e. no audible 'flaws') than a vinyl from the tape, but the vinyl sounds more present and realistic.
What's more, this is the Analog forum ... where 'talking down digital' is quite acceptable. The basic point is that you're coming into the Analog forum and touting digital's superiority ... I'm talking about context. Please disregard this statement as you have every other logical statement anyone has made thus far.