How Science Got Sound Wrong

It's all the high frequencies.  The better the digital gets, the better the high frequencies not getting as messed up.  Digital amp actual is pretty good with the bass, but don't let it near your tweeters.  Many people say digital CD is almost if not equal vinyl especially with hi-res digital.  Many people are making it out like digital vs. vinyl but it should be phrased within the context of where in the frequency band it messes up the most - high vs. low.  

By the way, it's hard to imagine this thread is longer than the break-in thread.  Never thought anything could be longer than break-in, no pun intended.  

The bass frequencies of CDs aren’t that great, either, if you ask me. I’m just trying to be helpful here. The bass of CDs - unless certain uh, protocols are followed - lack definition, depth, fullness, slam, pop, bloom and pizazz. In fact, I’d opine bass frequencies are largely missing in action. Afterthought - the midrange ain’t that great, either. Yes, I know, a lot of people out there will say, But my system sounds fabulous! 

The bass frequencies of CDs aren’t that great, either, if you ask me

I am pretty sure you've got a CDP at your home.  

«Even the best CDs can only resolve time down to 23 microseconds, while our nervous systems need at least 10 times better resolution, in the neighborhood of two to three microseconds. In crass amplitude terms, that missing microtime resolution seems like “only” tiny percentage points. However, it carries a whopping 90% of the resolution information the nervous system cares about. We need that microtime to hear the presence and depth of sounds outside us and to sense others’ emotions inside us.» William Softky

My understanding of his point is that Softky say that even if a digitized system that is bandwidth limited has high temporal precision, the digitized system does not have enough precision, for example in the 2-3 microseconds limits...

The body-brain sensors interact synchronistically in this 2-3 micro-seconds windows, and for Softky, digitized system lack this microtime synchronization between the lived 3-d real world where sound lives in synchronization with the body brain sensors...The digitized system does not incorporated all the information that is received by the body brain sensors, and the body-brain sensors are not reducible to the ears-brain system, reduced itself to the digital simulation of his capabilities...Processing sounds begins with the body movement not only the passive theoretical hypothetical actual ear-brain system.

The microtime concept of Softky is neurophysical and is linked to that multi scale synchronization of the body-brain and not only to the sampling processes in digitized audio...


This is my understanding, then your critic is, even if valid, miss his whole argument...And that argument of Softky is a valid problem of reseach whose goal is precisely to improve digitized system in their capabilities to emulate in the future this multi scale synchronization maps implicated in the hearing process, that is way more complicate that what say digitized system theory actually about sampling processes and their particular restricted concept of microtime ...


I am in no way competent to discuss all that, less knowledgeable than most people here in digital audio, but my understanding of this article is contrary to your dismissing of it because of this precise point in digital information technology about the author’s alleged erroneously concept of micro time in sampling processes....

The concept of micro time of the writer is complex and has it roots in the body-brain synchronization sensors, and is not reducible to the concept of micro time inherent in sampling processes... In a word digital audio technology in general suppose that hearing is reducible to a concept of microtime not complex enough to incorporate the lived experience of the body brain sensors and not enough refine also...

The sound events conveyed by the body-brain sensors, implicating 2-3 microseconds intervals, are events for the whole body-brain, and are not isomorph in a timelike manner to the simulation maps of the sound constructed in audio digital technology, because these timing maps of the brain-body and the body brain flows are not reducible to the simpler artificial time maps of digital audio tech that recreated sound in their limited microtime sampled environment ...

I apologize for my atrocious use of English ….And if so, I apologize for my lack of understanding, my only excuse is i try to understand this article, and I cannot dismiss Softky reflexion on the sole basis of Atdavid criticism... My best to him and to all...