That you think digital discards things, while analog recordings do not just shows more lack of understanding. Attacking me for holes in your knowledge is not a good look. I seem to know exactly what timbre is, I just don’t feel a need to attach special qualities to it beyond what it is.You caricature your opponent before attacking their so called argument after putting it in their mouth...(oups
I never said that only digital discard things, analog too discard things, or better said each has his limitations for the perception of timbre.... The ears/brain is not an analog only or digital only device...
And what a ridiculous thing to say that you know what timbre is but dont attach to it special qualities among other sound characteristics... This only disqualify your point.... Timbre is the basic phenomena in acoustic....Not only that the timbre experience is the means by which musician chose their instrument, or their audio system listening to them ....Not by the act of faith in Nyquist theorem....
My point is only that timbre recognition is perhaps not perfect for many analog and many digital system...There is no Sirius ideal perspective to judge timbre perception...Except real listening
in specific and varied conditions...Imposing digital absolutely make no sense...Because timbre recognition before being a digital or analog translation in a new, different room from the recorded event is always a brain/ears phenomenon and not an equation in theory of signals transformation ....
Sorry....