digital music sucks!

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by John, Apr 2, 2005.

  1. John

    CQ Guest

    John in Detroit said...
    Then why are you XPosting this silly thread into the alt.music.mp3 group?
    No, you are the one whining about slapping people into "ignore filters"
    and such.

    I'm the one laughing at you for taking your fool self and the mini disc
    format so seriously.

    HAND
     
    CQ, Apr 4, 2005
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. John

    Mannr Guest

    You might want to consider something like a "Creative Nomad Jukebox 3" as
    well. These have only line input, so you'd need an external preamp, but a
    standard mixer would do that. The advantage of this setup is that you can
    record for long times (in WAV, uncompressed), you can record both 44.1K and
    48K, and you can transfer takes easier/faster to the computer. Oh yeah, the
    unit writes date stamps on the files too, so this may make organization
    easier.

    Note that this product is discontinued, so you have to get used or refurbished
    units, eg., from Ebay. I think they are $150 now for refurb units, but
    availability varies.

    Note also that this exact model (Nomad Jukebox 3) is the only unit that
    records. Don't get stuck with another brand/model.

    Good luck.

    Richard
     
    Mannr, Apr 4, 2005
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. John

    Mannr Guest

    Sorry. I put that in the wrong thread.

    Richard
     
    Mannr, Apr 4, 2005
    #23
  4. John

    Bob Cain Guest

    Seems that way to me too. My first take was that he was
    stating that analog tape objectively sounds better than
    digital but that's not at all what he meant.
    Yeah, so did my Aiwa AM-F80 (before I kneeled on it and
    broke the display.)

    I am really looking forward to seeing if the new offerings
    are more generous in letting you control the disposition of
    your own PCM recordings. I'm not willing to buy into the
    current Hi-MD situation. Yeah, there are workarounds unless
    you fail at uploading for some reason twice in succession
    but that's just not good enough.


    Bob
    --

    "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
    simpler."

    A. Einstein
     
    Bob Cain, Apr 4, 2005
    #24
  5. John

    Bob Cain Guest

    Ah, but you subsequently blame that on ear degradation. I
    don't think a 17 year old girl with virgin ears could do so
    (they have been shown to have the most acute hearing with
    the broadest frequency response.)
    Could that not have been the harshness of raw, unprocessed
    reality? I think part of what tape does is "take off the
    rough edges" of recorded sound. Digital from the mic on
    through is savagely accurate.

    Given the sad state of speaker technology compared to the
    nuances we are talking about at nearly any other point in
    the chain, it may well be that tape sound is parametrically
    trimmed to be within the speaker limitations so as to not
    expose their deficiencies to the extent that digital does.
    While I did no critical listening in those early days, every
    pro I've heard talk about it says the same thing. I think
    you are quite safe in saying that the earlier one had
    problems that weren't yet very well understood.
    No, I think that we can hear things in sound that have
    Fourier components above what we can hear as pure sinusoids.
    I maintain that the sinusoid is a poor test of what the
    ear can manage but have no real idea how it should be probed
    instead. Nature knew nothing from sinusoids during the
    evolution of the ear but it knew a whole lot and needed to
    deduce a whole lot from the transient content of a twig
    snapping. I'm certain that there are transient feature
    detectors in addition to the cochlear resonators that
    sinusoids trigger. Triggering transient detectors can
    easily require Fourier components above those which there
    are resonators for.

    So, it's my theory that people with good hearing need
    bandwidth above 22 kHz in reproduction in order to get
    everything that the ear can detect. Some really smart
    people think I'm full of shit on this but no one has really
    done the work to dispute or affirm it other than these DBT
    tests of Arny's (I'm pretty sure now that it was Arny
    Kruger, the desciple of DBT in audio, that performed them)
    and his results tend to support me. What is totally unknown
    is at what frequency this sensitivity disappears for good
    ears. The next thing tested above 48 kHz sample rate is
    usually 96 kHz and that is almost certainly well beyond what
    the human ear is sensitive to. All that aside, I don't
    think what is above 22 kHz much impacts the listening
    experience for anyone even if DB testing can show some
    sensitivity there.

    A common belief among A/D and D/A designers is that the
    higher knee on the realizable input and output filters
    causes there to be less (audible) phase shift within the
    upper region. That phase shift, however, is very small even
    at 44.1 kHz. I've done a lot of precision speaker and mic
    impulse response measurement and there is just no way that
    the small amount of phase shift introduced by those filters
    can be meaningful in comparison to the brutalization of
    magnitude and phase that occurs in that uppermost region due
    to the realities of microphones and speakers.


    Bob
    --

    "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
    simpler."

    A. Einstein
     
    Bob Cain, Apr 4, 2005
    #25
  6. Sorry, did not look at the envelope. I post in a totally different NG
    from alt.music.mp3 (I also do not post in alt.computer) the original was
    cross posted to alt.audio.minidisc which is where I post.

    After this reply (Which I"m cross posting only because it's an apology)
    I'll check to make sure it gets limited to minidisc only.

    And your reply is not a whine, nor is mine in the context it's posted
     
    John in Detroit, Apr 4, 2005
    #26
  7. I had an upload fail on this computer, and my other computer refused to
    even tough the file (Said File owned by a different computer) I was not
    willing to attempt another try with this one for obvious (2nd failure
    it's gone) reasons so did the old work around.

    Instead of transfer I hit PLAY

    But first I put Total Recorder in to "Record from software" mode

    It transfered (Admittedly real time) to my big box bit perfect.
     
    John in Detroit, Apr 4, 2005
    #27
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.