inna wrote:
Wow that’s ridiculous. Just a flat out erroneous claim.
Says inna.
The logic you are proposing is simply untenable.
The process of recorded sound to play back relies on transducers; that is of transducing one form of energy/signal to another. To use your analogy, of translating one "language" to another.
Microphones transduce acoustic energy into electrical energy. Right there you are changing the signal to a whole different "language." Speakers are electrical transducers, converting electrical energy into acoustic energy. With a lot happening in between.
Oh no, if you play a vinyl record, so beloved by many audiophiles (including me) now the signal has been translated to a new physical language - physical grooves! Just how alike to a real trumpet playing are physical grooves in vinyl???? Better not translate that again it should just stay as grooves. Drat, how do we get to hear it? Oh yes, by translating those physical structures into an electrical signal, that go through other alterations to be translated again by the speaker.
If we took the principle you are trying to sell about digital being an invalid form because it must be converted from one system of information to another, we couldn’t listen to analog either. It’s just silly.
I have a really nice turntable set up and a digital source, and both sound fantastic, as a great many audiophiles have found.
But of course, the implication inna has set up here will be that’s because we aren’t "talented listeners" whereas inna of course is a talented listener.
We are so fortunate to have "talented listeners" like inna tell us what’s what.
This whole thread is based on a silly ego stroke.
Michael, languages are untranslatable.
Wow that’s ridiculous. Just a flat out erroneous claim.
If the language is digital you must not convert it into analog, you must take it as it is. This is for machines not humans, as we are now.
Says inna.
The logic you are proposing is simply untenable.
The process of recorded sound to play back relies on transducers; that is of transducing one form of energy/signal to another. To use your analogy, of translating one "language" to another.
Microphones transduce acoustic energy into electrical energy. Right there you are changing the signal to a whole different "language." Speakers are electrical transducers, converting electrical energy into acoustic energy. With a lot happening in between.
Oh no, if you play a vinyl record, so beloved by many audiophiles (including me) now the signal has been translated to a new physical language - physical grooves! Just how alike to a real trumpet playing are physical grooves in vinyl???? Better not translate that again it should just stay as grooves. Drat, how do we get to hear it? Oh yes, by translating those physical structures into an electrical signal, that go through other alterations to be translated again by the speaker.
If we took the principle you are trying to sell about digital being an invalid form because it must be converted from one system of information to another, we couldn’t listen to analog either. It’s just silly.
I have a really nice turntable set up and a digital source, and both sound fantastic, as a great many audiophiles have found.
But of course, the implication inna has set up here will be that’s because we aren’t "talented listeners" whereas inna of course is a talented listener.
We are so fortunate to have "talented listeners" like inna tell us what’s what.
This whole thread is based on a silly ego stroke.