Article: "Spin Me Round: Why Vinyl is Better Than Digital"

That’s Ok. It is what it is. Just not particularly useful

It is not useful for the debate but it is interesting because she know what the theory of signal is...and she speak humanly about this debate without BIAS....


Mapman you are right then ... It is ONLY intended for the general public not to end the debate... I read her and consider interesting the fact that like me she does not condemn turntable afficionados in the name of "science" nor she proclaim that some science derived from by Nyquist theorem posit an absolute fact: digital is the only way...She only interrogate herself thats all in all modesty, knowing that mathematic so useful it is is not reality...

She only relate his human experience vulgarizing elementary fact for the gemeral reader that’ s all...



Now the interesting fact here, is that a vinyl dogmatic said few posts above that the article is bad, and now the other digital dogmatic said the same exact thing , the article is bad...

What is comical is the 2 dogmatics use the same distorted argument , incompetence, and falsified what she said...





« Atheist and hard religious believers are like identical sausage burned on the fire of blind faith»-Anonymus Smith

i will translate it for an audio forum:

Analog zealot and digital fool are identical janus brothers, a MYSTERY cannot be reduced to subjective impression nor to a sequence of numbers ONLY....

What is the mystery?

The distance between numbers and human perceived phenomena is the unfathomable mystery....

The correlation between numbers and human perception is the road of science through this mystery....

When arguments lose touch with reality they always end up far into the deep end. Me 2021.

« Atheist and hard religious believers are like identical sausage burned on the fire of blind faith»-Anonymus Smith

When arguments lose touch with reality they always end up far into the deep end. Me 2021.

« Atheist and hard religious believers are like identical sausage burned on the fire of blind faith»-Anonymus Smith

My friend is it all you have to say after my post?

If so this is a pathetic reply sorry...

After distorting the fact of the article to assert the supposed incompetence of a mathematician to understand the Nyquist theorm, which she proved she understand, modulo my citation of this same article versus you false rendition of his formulation...( By the way Fourier Theory and Nyquist theorem is simple matter for ANY mathematician)

You affirm she only said that:
"Infinite points implies infinite bandwidth and infinite signal to noise." But she never said that like it was his thinking at all...

But she said this: " because humans only hear sounds within a certain range of frequencies, we can get rid of any other frequencies that may show up in a sound wave’s decomposition and still get back the original sound. So the sampling theorem explains how to use a finite amount of information to store any sound wave. "

Which is also the beginning matter of the Shannon-Nyquist theorem itself....

Then you distorted the fact for the sake of your childish dogma in a discussion with me and to win against me, you distorted the content of what she said......

For sure you think i am an idiot unable to reply.... You are not ashamed?

Saying that she said that in principle digital is able to recreate analog completely....which is your dogma or absolute belief...But she herself know also better and that the map is not the territory, then assume nothing about those who judge analog superior and dont judge them ignorant like you affirm.... And this is also why you accuse her to be incompetent...

Is it not bad faith or perhaps ignorance from your part? I let you chose....

I think that you presume that all people here are unable to understand your argument(theorem) then you go with any bullshit... This is why you are not ashamed...You think no one will be able to understand the points discussed...English is perhaps not my language but i can think....





It seems you are not ashamed anyway... Then you end all your false argument finally  with this fish tail remark post about my humoristic way to describe, at the end of my last post, blind believers of all origins, be it techno- fad or religious zealot  or analog fad or digital brain fool?



I am ashamed for you....

Good night....

Such a harmeless article and so much dust kicked about... 😏 
And yet again - IT ALL DEPENDS - ! 

Just now playing SANTANA, ABRAXES, on MoFi CD vs MoFi LP and...

LP sounds a bit more 'alife' / a bit different, all be it better.
The CD here is definately NOT better, special jewel case, gold plated CD back and all. 

I could mention some of my small collection where clearly the reverse is the case also. 

Case in point, Abbey Road by the Beatles (I'd mentioned) were the CD, no lift-up special  MoFi jewel case, no gold plated CD back, et al, but sounding more dynamic. Eh! 
MAYBE some well kept older, than my more recent, LP pressing will change this? Well, maybe and than mabe NOT. 

So call it mastering, call it what ever, - IT DEPENDS - , as I said.
So why keep fuzzing about what's better? 🤔 

It depends, case by case, as an LP can sound warmer, richer, fuller etc. and yet the CD can STILL sound better, all in all - and as pointed out, the reverse ABSOLUTELY can be the case well. 
Sorry for spoiling the arguments, eh. 🙏 
Michélle 🇿🇦