Does analog move more air. . . ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
mshilarious said:
Go right ahead, and while that takes you another week, notice that I ran an 18/19kHz signal (this measures not only HF response but also undesirable distortion products like IMD and jitter) from the CD player on the Tascam CD-A500 out (analog of course, this unit doesn't have a digi out) to an entirely ordinary 2003-vintage soundcard and posted the result . . . oh, on page 2 of this thread . . . post #30 . . . so check your converters at some high frequency, or better yet, a pair of frequencies, or just shoot a square wave at 'em and compare input to output on the scope (dual trace?). Then do the same thing with one of your tape recorders.

It ain't rocket surgery . . .
Click to expand...

I have "Dual 2246's", and each one is a 4 trace scope!

VP
 
Bobbsy said:
Actually, the clue should be in the word "analogue" (or "analog" for left-ponders) itself: "something that bears and analogy to something else".

And your analogue electrical signals are exactly that: an electrical representation of the original pressure oscillations in the trasmission medium (in our case, usually air). So, by the time you get your precious analogue recording, the sound has already gone through one conversion (the transducer in the microphone) and several processes (mic pre amp, bias amp in the recorder, etc).

Now this doesn't mean it can't sound good--but don't argue that your analogue signal hasn't been converted. The only original in the chain is the pressure waves in the air.

As for "an analogue signal has a theoretically infinite resolution", the key word is "theoretically". I could theoretically be a millionaire--but, in practical terms, I have $2.75 in my pocket just now.

(Oh, and that bad joke is analagous to the digital vs. analogue situation.)
Click to expand...

Oh I understand "An Analog of something", the difference is the Analog does not go through the "Fabrication" of A/D and D/A converters.

VP
 
CrowsofFritz said:
AtoDeficient..... WHAT HAVE YOU DONE...
Click to expand...

I really don't know.. . It's just sound, y'know ?. . . Vibrations. . . . Noise, really. . . . Nothing for everyone to get so freakin'. . . . freaky over.

I had NO IDEA that my original thread would spin off into several sit-coms. . . Let me know if I'm entitled to any syndication royalties. . .
 
Bobbsy said:
AUD.

Hey, that's another good analogy. If it was USD2.75 and I converted to USD, the number is 2.60608. Now, this would normally round off to $2.61 but the smallest coin in Australia is 5 cents so that $2.61 gets rounded to $2.60.

However, it still buys me a bottle of cheap wine!

Now, THAT is a conversion!
Click to expand...
I use a JC converter, no jitter, no flutter just infinitely changes coin directly into wine. It beats the 'hell' out of analog. :)
 
Bobbsy said:
Another "boxer" here. I've discovered a very drinkable Traminer-Riesling blend (THISl one) which is $15.99 per 4 litre box ($14.99 if I buy four at a time--I buy four at a time) which is a nice light summer drink.

Once the weather cools down, I tend to move to a Shiraz or a Shiraz-Cabernet blend. Hmmm...must try doing my own mixes! (In more than the audio sense!).
Click to expand...
it's all just an alcohol delivery system.
I buy a nice merlot at WalMart that's 2.97 a bottle ...... VERY nice tasting wine and it has alcohol in it!
And blind tests have shown that people can't really tell the difference between wines that well.

:)

But ultimately it's all about getting alcohol into your system .... if you wanted something that tastes good you'd have a chocolate shake.

So often I just go for Captain on the rocks.
 
Lt. Bob said:
And blind tests have shown that people can't really tell the difference between wines that well.
Click to expand...

Well . . . now . . . wine is just a bunch of chemicals, so if you take a white wine that lacks certain anthocyanins and has lower pH (or is it higher? I am bad at chemical lingo, but the white is about 3.3 and the red more like 3.8) and you dump the missing chemicals and buffers into the white wine, then is it not a red wine? Where did you get the anthocyanins in the first place? Probably extracted them from a red wine fermentation . . .

On the other hand if you give a blindfolded taster two glasses of shiraz and one glass of merlot, can they match the shiraz glasses? I'll have wifey test me on that later tonight, although the box merlot is higher acidity than the bottled shiraz so I don't think it will be hard, it's less tannic as well which is why I add the oak chips. Sour and bitter are basic senses so discrimination should not be difficult. Let's see!

Master sommeliers (which I ain't, my nose is mostly shot) are required to pass a number of really difficult blind tastings to earn their certification . . .
 
Lt. Bob said:
So often I just go for Captain on the rocks.
Click to expand...

One of the advantages of the Aussie state where I live is that they grow sugar cane here...and, with sugar can, comes rum. I've come to quite like the local version (known as Bundaberg--cause that's the town where they make it). A bit more burnt caramel flavour than Captain...and very good around sunset!
 
mshilarious said:
Well . . . now . . . wine is just a bunch of chemicals, so if you take a white wine that lacks certain anthocyanins and has lower pH (or is it higher? I am bad at chemical lingo, but the white is about 3.3 and the red more like 3.8) and you dump the missing chemicals and buffers into the white wine, then is it not a red wine? Where did you get the anthocyanins in the first place? Probably extracted them from a red wine fermentation . . .

On the other hand if you give a blindfolded taster two glasses of shiraz and one glass of merlot, can they match the shiraz glasses? I'll have wifey test me on that later tonight, although the box merlot is higher acidity than the bottled shiraz so I don't think it will be hard, it's less tannic as well which is why I add the oak chips. Sour and bitter are basic senses so discrimination should not be difficult. Let's see!

Master sommeliers (which I ain't, my nose is mostly shot) are required to pass a number of really difficult blind tastings to earn their certification . . .
Click to expand...
I saw an interesting article that some here at HR linked to where they had a BIG test ...... hundreds of blind tastings.
And even among the master sommeliers only 1 out of 10 would give a wine they had already tasted the same score as they did the first time.
It was pretty interesting and convincing ..... and, in fairness, it points out that taste and hearing and all our senses are taking place in the brain and are subject to us making them what we want or expect them to be.

As a piano tuner I can tell you flat out that you hear differently on different days and sometimes the only difference might be your mood.

And further .... what that means is that even though I say I can heard differences between digital and analog ........ it could very well be all in my head.
I still have to go with what I think I hear and I do have very good and well trained ears ......... nonetheless ....... as someone else in this thread said ..... subjective things are all in the mind of the person viewing them.
No matter how sure you are about what you hear or taste ....... it could very well be all in your head.
 
I have solved the original queston from 35 pages ago!!!!

I opened up my computer and it has 4 case fans, a CPU heatsink fan and a PSU fan, so six total fans moving air

I opened up my analog, EQ's, Compressors, Pres, channel strips, summing busses and none of them has any fans, no air movement

So, in my house at least, digital moves more air. Question Answered!!!!

(now if only I could find some opinions on which one sounds better, maybe I should start a thread)
 
Lt. Bob said:
I saw an interesting article that some here at HR linked to where they had a BIG test ...... hundreds of blind tastings.
And even among the master sommeliers only 1 out of 10 would give a wine they had already tasted the same score as they did the first time.
It was pretty interesting and convincing ..... and, in fairness, it points out that taste and hearing and all our senses are taking place in the brain and are subject to us making them what we want or expect them to be.
Click to expand...

I expect there would be a tolerance on scoring, that is highly subjective. Reviewer mags will use a tasting panel for that reason, and if there is too much variation they would retest. I would guess my tolerance day-to-day would be +/-3 pts (100 pt scale, but practically unless the wine is vinegar the scale is 75-100). So, that's +/-10%.

Winemaking and tasting styles change over time as well, so that makes comparability across years difficult.

My test is a simple ABX, not which is best. First you have to figure out if you can reliably discriminate between varietals.

If you give me two wines from the same varietal, region, and general quality (within 5 pts on a professional review), I would not expect I could pass an ABX. Maybe, maybe not. Actually you could leave region out of that for many varietals because there is an "international" style for a lot of varietals now.

And further .... what that means is that even though I say I can heard differences between digital and analog ........ it could very well be all in my head.
Click to expand...

I think it would depend on the production methodology.
 
AtoDeficient said:
I really don't know.. . It's just sound, y'know ?. . . Vibrations. . . . Noise, really. . . . Nothing for everyone to get so freakin'. . . . freaky over.

I had NO IDEA that my original thread would spin off into several sit-coms. . . Let me know if I'm entitled to any syndication royalties. . .
Click to expand...

Looks like the worst has subsided. Now we are talking about wine. LOL! :D
 
Good thing about wine, it won’t matter if what you’re listening to is digital or analog, it will all sound wonderful.
 
Bristol Posse said:
I have solved the original queston from 35 pages ago!!!!

I opened up my computer and it has 4 case fans, a CPU heatsink fan and a PSU fan, so six total fans moving air

I opened up my analog, EQ's, Compressors, Pres, channel strips, summing busses and none of them has any fans, no air movement

So, in my house at least, digital moves more air. Question Answered!!!!

(now if only I could find some opinions on which one sounds better, maybe I should start a thread)
Click to expand...
:laughings:
 
mshilarious said:
I think it would depend on the production methodology.
Click to expand...
probably. The test I used about 6 years ago was to make very careful recordings of records I knew really well on my Masterlinks ..... I have a VPI 'table with Audioquest arm and a nice Lehman Black Cube phone pre with Sumiko Blue Point Special cart.

When I would make recordings of it I would hear a difference in the areas I mentioned earlier.
I was positive about it and tried it quite a few times and the results were always the same although it would vary depending on the music being recorded.
Differences were more pronounced with delicate acoustic stuff and non-existent with compressed high energy rock.

Although I haven't done the test again in quite a while I know that at the time I spent a week or so doing it with various albums I was very familiar with.
By the way ...... MY vinyl doesn't have clicks and pops in it for the most part ..... my stuff is pristine and cleaned with a VPI HW 16.5 cleaning machine.
So all I was listening to was the music and it was all stuff I knew very well.

At the time there was no doubt in my mind .... and I was equally positive that going to 24/96k ended the issue as I could no longer hear any differences.

But I'm not closed minded and I accept the fact that when you get to subjective stuff ...... it is possible for you to fool yourself.
 
I never had the Masterlink, but the Alesis converters I had from that era had some audible passband attenuation--even though I can't hear an 18.5kHz sine anymore, enough such attenuation does seem to be audible.

For example, embedded in my fake cymbal test was a sample rate test--the two "hits" are not the same, one was down & upsampled from 44.1, and they are different left to right (just for a little hearing test). I can hear a difference between the two, because that SRC has similar passband attenuation.

I'd be interested to know if you repeated the test at 48 whether you got the same result, or if you offset the attenuation at 44.1 with a bit of EQ.
 
Lt. Bob said:
ok poser.

You're such a waste of time.
You like to alienate even those that show a modicum of support for your position.

So ....... every single person on this board knows you're a poser with no actual knowledge or experience.
You NEVER produce the mythical results you claim to get from your non-existant experimentation.

A loser and a poser.
Click to expand...

You dont know anything about my knowledge or experience. Your post shows what kind of person you are. I think the members of this board can make up their own minds about the credibility and integrity of the members here.

Have a nice day!:)

ViP
 
mshilarious said:
I never had the Masterlink, but the Alesis converters I had from that era had some audible passband attenuation--even though I can't hear an 18.5kHz sine anymore, enough such attenuation does seem to be audible.

For example, embedded in my fake cymbal test was a sample rate test--the two "hits" are not the same, one was down & upsampled from 44.1, and they are different left to right (just for a little hearing test). I can hear a difference between the two, because that SRC has similar passband attenuation.

I'd be interested to know if you repeated the test at 48 whether you got the same result, or if you offset the attenuation at 44.1 with a bit of EQ.
Click to expand...

I had a Masterlink, for a day, the door wouldnt open. When I called Alesis HQ which to my surprise was a 1/2 hour away from me, I got an arrogant youngster who didnt know a thing about Alesis "Stuff". I returned it and never bought any more of their "Stuff" again.

VP
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top