Why no interest in reel to reel if you're looking for the ultimate sound?

@geoffkait


You can measure all you want but there is one central truth:

Music (sound) is analog and by changing that signal to digital something is lost. Something is lost once again when you change it back to analog so your ears can understand it. This is part and parcel of Newton's 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It is known as Entropy. It is immutable.

Additionally, when you sample a analog signal, by definition, there is some period of time when you are NOT sampling. This information is lost forever. Yes, if the sampling rate is high enough - and in Redbook CDs it is not even close -  you don't tend to notice these losses as obvious. The loss seems to be realized as a loss of "presence" or depth of soundstage or perhaps a certain "air", This is why vinyl has seen such a resurgence; it stays in the analog domain. Bench measurements have been shown over and over to be a distraction in audio. All that matters is your ears.

I don’t think you realize I’m on your side, dude. Hel-loo! 🤗

No offence, rrcpa, but you don't seem to understand thermodynamics or sampling theory.

When you record on tape, something is lost. Tape is neither infinite bandwidth nor infinite signal to noise, and even speed and level is not consistent, hence something is always "lost".  Your statement, -- "there is some period of time when you are NOT sampling. This information is lost forever."-- , only shows your lack of understanding of how analog sampling in a system limited by bandwidth works. If the system is bandwidth limited, say 50KHz, far beyond anything ever shown to be detectable ever, and where most tape has no response either, then sampling at 192KHz will capture everything within the limits of the signal to noise and dynamic range of the A/D system. You can attempt to debate it, but unless you have an advanced math degree, it would probably be pointless.  Redbook CD is sufficient to capture all the information up to 20KHz, again within the limits of it's SNR and dynamic range.

Want to talk about a format where things are lost? ... let's talk vinyl. RIAA equalization and de-equalization coupled with potential for imperfect cartridge loading, tracking error, etc. throws away level information, and the limited channel seperation throws away a ton of data w.r.t. what should have been coming out of each channel.   A significant majority of that "resurgent" vinyl was digital at some point of the process. Very little vinyl is pure analog.


Measurements can tell us about accuracy, they can't tell us what you will like. Claiming that tape or vinyl is more "accurate" isn't supportable at the device level. Vinyl may modify the signal (and it most certainly does) in a way that is pleasant to a lot of audiophiles and there is certainly a resurgence in vinyl buying, but most of that is played are far from audiophile systems for nostalgia and cool factor.

Music (sound) is analog and by changing that signal to digital something is lost. Something is lost once again when you change it back to analog so your ears can understand it. This is part and parcel of Newton's 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It is known as Entropy. It is immutable.

Additionally, when you sample a analog signal, by definition, there is some period of time when you are NOT sampling. This information is lost forever. Yes, if the sampling rate is high enough - and in Redbook CDs it is not even close - you don't tend to notice these losses as obvious. The loss seems to be realized as a loss of "presence" or depth of soundstage or perhaps a certain "air", This is why vinyl has seen such a resurgence; it stays in the analog domain. Bench measurements have been shown over and over to be a distraction in audio. All that matters is your ears.

rrcpa

Music (sound) is analog and by changing that signal to digital something is lost.

That does seem intuitively true, but that doesn’t make it true. I’m an analog guy at heart, so I understand your preference.

Something is lost once again when you change it back to analog so your ears can understand it. This is part and parcel of Newton’s 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It is known as Entropy ...

Hmmm, that doesn’t apply here ...

Additionally, when you sample a analog signal, by definition, there is some period of time when you are NOT sampling. This information is lost forever.

Yes, that information is lost forever, that’s true. But the lost information is outside of the bandwidth of the system.

The notion that there is otherwise information "lost" between samples can be shown to be false fairly easily, as I’ve explained here previously. If you want to see the proof for yourself, this guy did all of the work for you.

As I’ve been saying lo these many months something is lost during the digital process of converting from analog but it’s not (rpt not) because of sampling or any such thing. It’s because the CD laser cannot read the data on the CD completely or accurately. But the data is all there on the CD. You just can’t retrieve it properly. However, I can hear what’s on the CD because I have solved the riddle of the Sphinx. I’m from the future where those problems no longer exist. Once you hear what’s actually on the CD it will freak you out. 😩