How Science Got Sound Wrong

Timing resolution of digitized bandwidth limited signals.

Of course, timing resolution and bandwidth limiting not being the same thing at all, except in some given limited mathematical applications.

Teo,

You are displaying the same technical ignorance as the author of the article. Just "stating" something without understanding the underlying mathematics does not make your statement true, not even remotely, all it says is you do not understand the underlying concepts.

Bandwidth, signal to noise, and jitter absolutely are the functions that define relative timing resolution in a digitized system and high quality audio is not some magic bullet that magically changes how math works. Even in high end audio, 1+1 = 2.

teo_audio1,245 posts11-21-2019 8:20am

Timing resolution of digitized bandwidth limited signals.

Of course, timing resolution and bandwidth limiting not being the same thing at all, except in some given limited mathematical applications.

High quality Audio ---not being one of them.

The author came up with an explanation that was wrong by trying to assert expertise in an area he does not have. In many ways that is worse than creating no explanation at all, because it deflects from understanding possible real reasons ... just look at this thread, and all the people trying to grasp onto an explanation that is simply wrong. What value is there in that ???


Many people prefer vinyl (even though much of the time the source material was digital). Many people prefer all digital chains.  It is a good thought exercise to try to determine if anything is wrong with digital, if you stick to things that are factual.  It is an equally good thought exercise to determine what is "wrong" with vinyl and what makes that sound attractive to many.

taras22301 posts11-21-2019 8:12amActually there is a problem for many people....for them digital does not sound as good as analog, and highly compressed is even worse. And the author was taking a shot at explaining that. And who knows he may not have explained himself adequately but that doesn’t mean that problem does not exist.

As for expertise, you’ll have to provide your own proof of that, with a name and a background on yourself.
 
We can and do have similar discussion over at DIYAudio, and the participants hang their shingle right on the posts they commit to. Scott Wurcer, Demian Martin, Nelson Pass, John Curl, and many more. No one there snipes from a hidden position.

I am sensing a Strawman argument there. I can assert that there's a humongous black hole in the center of our galaxy without having credentials in that area. you do NOT have to have credentials in some specific field to assert claims, or claims that are true. That would be silly since experts in a specialized field don't agree with each anyway.