DreamKing
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Posts
- 982
- Likes
- 218
Please see the reason why it is not - or ever can be enough - post # 6418, just above.
It is inherently limited by 44.1 kHz sampling. It has limited itself by its very own definition of Redbook.
It is MUCH more audible if something is missing entirely - then if there is some noise and distortion added to the correct signal. Analog does have higher distortion, lower channel separation, etc - but at least DOES reproduce (somewhat imperfectly...) what is available in live music. And, like it or not, anything limited to 20 kHz response will NEVER sound realistic - even if me ( the first to admit it - several dozens of times by now ) or (presumably) you can no longer hear pure sine wave 20 kHz signal .
There is digital well beyond CD - and as it begins to dawn, well beyond what analog could ever hope to achieve. And that was no slouch - up to approx 120 kHz from microphone capsule to output from the phono preamplifier - right down to the ribbon tweeter capable of response to 150 kHz.
Current state of the art crop of digital recorders ( or ADCs and DACs, if you prefer ) is roughly equalling it - and there ARE ways to get even better - where analog has reached its (un)reasonable limits.
How is it not realistic if its within the boundaries of established human hearing limits? You even admit to this fact in the next sentence. It can't get any realer than that. If you can't hear it, why make arguments for frequencies higher than Nyquist's?