A challenge to the "measurement" camp

The only people who make the claims you make Teo are people who don’t truly understand the technology. I have heard enough live and recorded music in short succession in a variety of situations to know, without any doubt, that well implemented high-res digital is the most accurate recording and playback, superior to analog tape at any speed. People who make claims about "missing resolution" in digital especially high resolution do not understand the technology. It is an ignorant position taken from a position of lack of knowledge and experience.

p.s. ever heard of FM or AM radio? ... been around way before digital.

when we get to the end of all that, we find that analog cables, in an all triode or v-fet system, is the only real functional signal capturing and playback chain.

No, that is just silly. You are confusing pleasing with accurate and they are not remotely the same thing. You are trying to take the complexity of sound, the ear and the brain, and claim the equivalent complexity in a signal in a cable or the storage of "data" required for that signal whether analog or digital. They are not remotely of the same level of complexity. It is a weak argument that is again, only made by people who have not thought this through.

The magic of the music has nothing to do with the format, it has to do with the industry. You seem to be joining mahgister on the conspiracy front.

You seem to be joining mahgister on the conspiracy front.

Most conspiracies are stupidity and greed....


 And by the way i have not read Teo audio like a defense of vinyl versus digital....But like an industry greed  taking the easy way....

@drbarney1 , you should question most of the marketing w.r.t. cables. Most of it is made up with no evidence that what they claim is what is causing any audible difference. This is not a "measurements" thing. If what they claimed was true, they would show it with good old fashion listening tests, heck, they would at least "try" to quantify what they claim, but they don't. Why? ....

You accuse me of conspiracy like if it was an insult without even reading my point about statistics.... And you are the one arguing about the fact that people had no argument .... Very funny....

It is easy instead of understanding someone complex viewpoint to put him on your chess board with black and white colors....Childish games.... Reality exceed what we think about it....

The map and the reality are totally different.....

Pretty much all recorded audio and video of analog or digital types is “sampled”. It’s bits of information, but easiest to show with videos, we all know 60 frames per second for film, and we believe we see motion as we do in real life. It boils down to how much resolution does there need to be before we can no longer see or hear a discernable difference, this is of course simplifying it, but makes the point. This is one place I can agree with Robert, current hi rez can contain more information than Anolog. Vinyl is “ bits” of information, cut into the vinyl. High resolution compared to say mp3 for sure. Cassette and reel to reel is also bits of info. It’s possible maybe for someone to feel analog sounds better, or more musical to them, because hi res might have more detail, assuming they’re able to hear it, and therefore maybe doesn’t seem as sweet or smooth. That has been suggested before.