What is the least compressed signal?

And furthermore, and this is going to sting a little bit, but when the engineer is very careful to preserve dynamic range on the CD the full dynamic range of that CD can never (rpt never) be realized in actual practice for the reasons I’ve been hounding people about. In fact the actual dynamic range of a well recorded CD with excellent dynamic range cannot be reproduced in the home on digital equipment. It’s not even close! Without even going into room acoustics and vibration isolation and rf, the primary culprits are the stray scattered laser light getting into the photodetector and the vibration, wobbling and fluttering of the disc itself. Both of those problems together I estimate to constrain and limit full dynamic range by at least 3 to 6 dB, probably even more. Just for those two problems. Not even counting all the other factors that contribute to compressing dynamic range in the room. And those losses from scattered light and disc vibration are not (rpt not) recoverable. No matter what you do, how good your equipment is, or what tweaks you employ, that 3-6 dB (at least) is gone forever. As Bob Dylan says at the end of all his songs, “good luck to everyone.”

n80
Are you sure quibbling is exactly the right word?


>>>>I was responding to erik_squires, who quipped he didn’t wish to quibble then proceeded to quibble.

Agree with Geoff on the top two paragraphs. kosst seems to be missing the point. As Geoff says, what the DR database data shows, correlates almost perfectly with the listening experience. It is eminently useful in that practical application regardless of technical minutia. And for the end listener that makes it the most valuable and accurate tool available to assess DR compression prior to purchase.

As for Geoff's last paragraph, it seems "quibbling" remains necessary. The severe and even moderate dynamic range compression on so many CDs is due to a dubious practice, not a limitation of the medium itself.

kosst_amojan

Bass is this giant, power sucking waveform that would send the needle sailing off the surface and crashing into the record were it physically represented in accurate proportion to the treble. And the treble is cranked WAY up just so the needle can pick it up ... the massive pre-amp connected to the needle that undoes an insane amount of dynamic compression ...

That is a very colorful dramatization of the LP process but it doesn't really mean anything. There's nothing at all insane about the RIAA curve and if you disagree, then you'd have to acknowledge that it's a pretty simple, straightforward process when compared to something such as CD, which relies on things like block-based error correcting codes, filtering, complex servo mechanisms and the like.

The only conclusion I can come to given the facts is that people generally like a dynamic range limited to about 60 or 70 dB, which would explain why some like vinyl with it's limited range so much.

Actually, a 60 to 70 dB dynamic range is quite broad - much more so than you'll find on most CDs. That's the simple fact you're choosing to dismiss. It's rather moot that CD is capable of much greater dynamic range because it's rarely needed musically, and even more rarely actually utilized. If ever.

n80

kosst seems to be missing the point. As Geoff says, what the DR database data shows, correlates almost perfectly with the listening experience.

Exactly! And if kosst actually bothered to consider some of the data and listen for himself, he'd understand that. That doesn't mean that the database is perfect, but it's certainly useful.