[Chu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOnlyOne /img/forum/go_quote.gif But vinyl does.... TheOnlyOne

Keyword is well-defined. The very first line of that post makes some assumptions that can and will be challenged if you attempt to define a hard upper limit.

Vinyl's resolution is theoretically infinite. There is no natural way to put a strict, derived, and authoritative line in the sand as you can with digital sources.

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Keyword is well-defined. The very first line of that post makes some assumptions that can and will be challenged if you attempt to define a hard upper limit. Vinyl's resolution is theoretically infinite. There is no natural way to put a strict, derived, and authoritative line in the sand as you can with digital sources.

A lower limit is set by the noise of a needle dragging through the groove. The upper limit is set by grooves that can only be cut so large otherwise they intersect. The signal to noise of vinyl is finite and smaller than optical technologies. Not to mention the mechanical cross-coupling between L and R walls. I view vinyl as a smaller sand box.

 

[Chu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnFerrier /img/forum/go_quote.gif A lower limit is set by the noise of a needle dragging through the groove. The upper limit is set by grooves that can only be cut so large otherwise they intersect. The signal to noise of vinyl is finite and smaller than optical technologies. Not to mention the mechanical cross-coupling between L and R walls. I view vinyl as a smaller sand box.

It might be smaller, but it's "smooth". There is no point where you can theoretically say "any difference between the generated waveform and the predicted waveform is past the theoretical limits of the medium and therefore irrelevant" because even if the difference is inaudible, it's theoretically possible for the medium to encode it.

The reality is very different but given enough time, money, and engineering knowhow you could make a record precise literally to the atomic scale.

Also statements like "a lower limit is set by the noise of the needle ..." while 100% true gives a very very wide berth to snake oil salesmen to play with (discounting the new laser players of course).

I sort of feel like I'm arguing with myself because I am in the camp that believes vinyl is completely inferior to digital encoding. All I'm saying is that it's a lot harder to fight snake oil salesmen in the realm of vinyl because, unlike the world of digital, there are no precise, mathematically derived limits past which precision is irrelevant. I'm not trying to argue in any way that vinyl is somehow superior to digital mediums because of their theoretical capabilities, people around here (generally) know what the reality is.

 

[TheOnlyOne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Vinyl's resolution is theoretically infinite. There is no natural way to put a strict, derived, and authoritative line in the sand as you can with digital sources.

How so, that there is no theoretically infinite resolution? There is a noise floor, there is a limited to the size of the groove’s swing, there is a limited to the detail that can be imprinted to the vinyl, and there is size to the stylus and therefore a limit to upper frequency that stylus can navigate. Not even getting into the magnet and the inductance part that would lock up the stylus movement at higher frequencies. About 35 years ago they tried to make quad records by making the rear channel ultrasonic frequencies, the problem with that was within a few plays those frequencies where destroyed by the stylus. Every time you play your vinyl, no matter how careful you are, the stylus destroys a little more high frequencies. So there is a natural and a mathematical limited to vinyl.

TheOnlyOne

 

[d.phens]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOnlyOne /img/forum/go_quote.gif Attachment 9584 Always remember, our senses can not be fooled. TheOnlyOne

Do you know a schizophrenic needs less time to see that picture warping?

 

[d.phens]

There's one thing I want to know (without revealing my own opinion to get an unbiased reply): Why should aftermarket cables sound better?

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chu /img/forum/go_quote.gif It might be smaller, but it's "smooth". There is no point where you can theoretically say "any difference between the generated waveform and the predicted waveform is past the theoretical limits of the medium and therefore irrelevant" because even if the difference is inaudible, it's theoretically possible for the medium to encode it.

There certainly is a limit to the ability of LPs to reproduce sound. I have a Telarc LP of Bizet's Carmen suite that has a bass drum whallop that I defy any turntable to track properly. I seriously doubt if the cutting head of the lathe even tracked it correctly. I have the same album on CD and it is a huge transient peak, but it's all there.

The idea that LPs have more information in them than CDs is complete bunk. They have a more restricted dynamic range (generally around 45dB), there is rolloff in the high frequencies to prevent distortion due to groove wear, and the lows are carefully controlled so the grooves don't bleed into each other. That's narrower dynamics and less extention in the highs and lows than a CD, and we haven't even talked about distortion, noise floor or channel separation yet.

Don't get me wrong... LPs are capable of great sound. It's a high fidelity medium. So are CDs.

See ya
Steve

 

[JohnFerrier]

"To perceive the world as a whole, our five senses have to team up in the brain--and in some cases, they actually seem to fuse with one another..." "Yet our brain is able to integrate all the stimuli and make sense of the cacophony of movement and sound. Exactly how this integration happens is not yet understood..." from Scientific American Mind April/May 2007 article titled Listening with Your Eyes

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif My God, Phil, give it a rest. You've become everything that you claim to dislike about BigShot.

I find that comment incredibly offensive.

In any event, I wasn't talking to you (and bigshot certainly doesn't need anyone to fight his battles), so may I politely suggest you take a long walk off a short pier.

 

[SoundGoon]

Why can't we all just get along? Agree to disagree?

Edit - However, I find that long walk off a short pier bit quite funny.

 

[gotchaforce]

The thing i find most funny about cables are comments like "there is more bass and i got extended highs!"

and then when asked for a frequency response proving this, apparently it cant be given for X reason.

 

[Febs]

.

 

[jonnywolfet]

[size=xx-small] Quote:

Garlic is widely used around the world for its pungent flavour, as a seasoning or condiment or to enhance other flavours. Depending on the form of cooking and the desired result, the flavor is either mellow or intense. It is often paired with onion, tomato, and/or ginger. It is very widely used in Lebanese cuisine: many Lebanese salads contain a garlic sauce. The parchment-like skin is relatively inedible, much like the skin of an onion. The skin is typically removed before cooking, though sometimes alternative approaches are used, such as slice garlic head crosswise, coat in olive oil, roast until the garlic is well cooked, and then the roasted garlic separates quite easily from the skins (by pulling it out, shaking it out, and/or squeezing it out). The term 'clove' is sometimes misinterpreted to mean the whole garlic bulb (head).

[/size]
i do love the taste of garlic... however, others may not.

 

[mbriant]

And so ends yet another example of how unfortunately these sort of "discussions" always wind up going to hell in a handbasket. ( don't really know exactly what that phrase means, but it sounds right ).