Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude111
This is for you Tommy,someone mentioned this on another thread im on (Different site)
Its not real listening digitally........ You cant hear the real sound......
|
With 78RPM the best scientific arguments against digital recording are basically moot (and non-scientiffic arguments are just some fool's opinion).
Let's use CD quality recording as an example, because it lacks compression (compression damages quality of digital recordings). 78s max frequency response usually topped out around 8-12KHz for the best copies. CD audio samples (instantaneously measures amplitude and records it as a data point) at 44KHz...The Nyquist Shannon sampling theorem states that to capture a frequency you need to sample it at atleast double the frequency, and the higher above the measured frequency you sample the better. With LPs where you could get upwards of 20KHz the highest frequencies are poorly sampled because they approach or exceed the Nyquist limit of 22KHz. But with 78s having a max frequency only half that 22KHz number they have effectively double the number of samples per cycle of what a digitized LP would have on their highest frequency and thus don't rub up against the sampling limit. 78s typically had fairly subdued dynamic range (difference between loudest and softest sound recorded) compared to even LPs (because 78s had higher surface noise) so CD quality has more than enough discreet amplitude levels to faithfully capture that.
And that's just CD quality audio...a standard nearly 40 years old! Nowadays there are digital recording standards that have much higher sampling frequcies that allow faithfully capturing audio frequencies so high humans can't hope hear them (which improves the number of samples in the audible range). These newer formats also have more discreet amplitude sampling levels than CD improving dynamic range. It's reached the point where you could AB test (or do the Pepsi challenge if you will) a quality LP and an uncompressed high quality digital recording of that LP and even an audience of sharp eared listeners couldn't tell you which is which...
You might be able to argue that with less than state of the art digital recording and a good master tape the digital is noticably worse, but against 78 RPM arguing that digital isn't capturing the sound faithfully is just plain silly.
Let me clue you into something if your playing a 78 that has been played before you aren't hearing the true sound of it either...Last time it was played the needle (probably in some heavy tracking windup machine 70-120 years ago) scapped off enough of the groove to see with the naked eye... resulting in high frequency undulations in the groove scraped clean off and replaced by noise, lower frequency wave shapes distorted and peaks chopped off or rounded.
The folks that complain that 5g tracking crosley phonos ruin LPs would have a stroke if they saw the damage most Pre-WWII equipment did to 78 records each play.