Group: rec.audio.high-end
Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
On Apr 8, 7:33 pm, bob <nabo...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> > The only thing that I find destructive to the sound of real music is lossy
> > compression.
> Seriously, you find that more destructive than, say, multiple
> generations of analog tape? (
Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
On Apr 8, 7:33 pm, bob <nabo...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> > The only thing that I find destructive to the sound of real music is lossy
> > compression.
> Seriously, you find that more destructive than, say, multiple
> generations of analog tape? (
Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
On Apr 9, 11:37 pm, eseedho...@gmail,com wrote:
> On Apr 8, 7:33 pm, bob <nabo...@hotmail,com > wrote:
>
> > > The only thing that I find destructive to the sound of real music is lossy
> > > compression.
> > Seriously, you find that more destructive than, say, multiple
> > generations of analog tape? (
>
> Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
It would certainly be lossy but it would not be compressed in the
digital sense. If the recording levels were kept high, there would be
some level compression during loud passages. Perhaps this is some of
the "warming" that the OP is seeking.
On Apr 9, 11:37 pm, eseedho...@gmail,com wrote:
> On Apr 8, 7:33 pm, bob <nabo...@hotmail,com > wrote:
>
> > > The only thing that I find destructive to the sound of real music is lossy
> > > compression.
> > Seriously, you find that more destructive than, say, multiple
> > generations of analog tape? (
>
> Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
It would certainly be lossy but it would not be compressed in the
digital sense. If the recording levels were kept high, there would be
some level compression during loud passages. Perhaps this is some of
the "warming" that the OP is seeking.
Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 20:37:11 -0700, eseedhouse@gmail,com wrote
(in article <ftk21702j91@news4.newsguy,com >):
> On Apr 8, 7:33 pm, bob <nabo...@hotmail,com > wrote:
>
>>> The only thing that I find destructive to the sound of real music is lossy
>>> compression.
>
>> Seriously, you find that more destructive than, say, multiple
>> generations of analog tape? (
>
> Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
>
no, several generations of analog tape would introduce analog compression if
any at all. The concept of lossy compression exists only in the digital world
and is meant to convey the idea that in a lossy compression scheme, a set
algorithm has been pre-programmed to "throw away" portions of the quantized
waveform that have been decided by the algorithm to be "not needed". This is
in opposition to lossless compression whereby the algorithm uses digital
"shorthand" to compress the digital bit stream. IOW, in lossless compression,
everything is represented, nothing is discarded and when uncompressed
everything is reconstructed exactly, bit-for-bit as it was before the
bitstream was compressed at all.
Analog compression works by either reducing the loudest signals to the level
of the softest, or by increasing the level of the softest to equal the level
of the loudest or a combination of the two. This can be done full spectrum
(like DBX) or selectively (like Dolby A, B).
In a tape recording, each generation of tape causes noise to build-up,
distortion to build-up, and transients to become less and less distinct, but
unless the original recording was recorded wildly "hot" (consistently
driving the meters over "0" Vu), no actual compression is indicated.
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 20:37:11 -0700, eseedhouse@gmail,com wrote
(in article <ftk21702j91@news4.newsguy,com >):
> On Apr 8, 7:33 pm, bob <nabo...@hotmail,com > wrote:
>
>>> The only thing that I find destructive to the sound of real music is lossy
>>> compression.
>
>> Seriously, you find that more destructive than, say, multiple
>> generations of analog tape? (
>
> Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
>
no, several generations of analog tape would introduce analog compression if
any at all. The concept of lossy compression exists only in the digital world
and is meant to convey the idea that in a lossy compression scheme, a set
algorithm has been pre-programmed to "throw away" portions of the quantized
waveform that have been decided by the algorithm to be "not needed". This is
in opposition to lossless compression whereby the algorithm uses digital
"shorthand" to compress the digital bit stream. IOW, in lossless compression,
everything is represented, nothing is discarded and when uncompressed
everything is reconstructed exactly, bit-for-bit as it was before the
bitstream was compressed at all.
Analog compression works by either reducing the loudest signals to the level
of the softest, or by increasing the level of the softest to equal the level
of the loudest or a combination of the two. This can be done full spectrum
(like DBX) or selectively (like Dolby A, B).
In a tape recording, each generation of tape causes noise to build-up,
distortion to build-up, and transients to become less and less distinct, but
unless the original recording was recorded wildly "hot" (consistently
driving the meters over "0" Vu), no actual compression is indicated.
Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
On Apr 10, 5:46 pm, Sonnova <sonn...@audiosanatorium,com > wrote:
> > Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
>
> no, several generations of analog tape would introduce analog compression if
> any at all.
And "analogue compression" is defined as ...?
The concept of lossy compression exists only in the digital world
And your evidence that this is so is....?
> In a tape recording, each generation of tape causes noise to build-
up,
> distortion to build-up, and transients to become less and less distinct, but
> unless the original recording was recorded wildly "hot" (consistently
> driving the meters over "0" Vu), no actual compression is indicated.
So it reduces the dynamic range and it cannot be reconstructed to the
sound of the original. I think that fits any reasonable definition of
"lossy compression" myself. Of course LC is usually done by computers
using an algorithm, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done by other
means. If it's compression and it involves loss of signal components
as well then in my book that's "lossy compression". Whether it's done
by a comuter running an algortihm or by re-recording on several
generations of analogue tape is beside the point, so far as I can see.
On Apr 10, 5:46 pm, Sonnova <sonn...@audiosanatorium,com > wrote:
> > Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
>
> no, several generations of analog tape would introduce analog compression if
> any at all.
And "analogue compression" is defined as ...?
The concept of lossy compression exists only in the digital world
And your evidence that this is so is....?
> In a tape recording, each generation of tape causes noise to build-
up,
> distortion to build-up, and transients to become less and less distinct, but
> unless the original recording was recorded wildly "hot" (consistently
> driving the meters over "0" Vu), no actual compression is indicated.
So it reduces the dynamic range and it cannot be reconstructed to the
sound of the original. I think that fits any reasonable definition of
"lossy compression" myself. Of course LC is usually done by computers
using an algorithm, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done by other
means. If it's compression and it involves loss of signal components
as well then in my book that's "lossy compression". Whether it's done
by a comuter running an algortihm or by re-recording on several
generations of analogue tape is beside the point, so far as I can see.
Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:51:30 -0700, eseedhouse@gmail,com wrote
(in article <fu11n2016kf@news1.newsguy,com >):
> On Apr 10, 5:46 pm, Sonnova <sonn...@audiosanatorium,com > wrote:
>>> Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
>>
>> no, several generations of analog tape would introduce analog compression if
>> any at all.
>
> And "analogue compression" is defined as ...?
>
> The concept of lossy compression exists only in the digital world
>
> And your evidence that this is so is....?
> > In a tape recording, each generation of tape causes noise to build-
> up,
>> distortion to build-up, and transients to become less and less distinct, but
>> unless the original recording was recorded wildly "hot" (consistently
>> driving the meters over "0" Vu), no actual compression is indicated.
>
> So it reduces the dynamic range and it cannot be reconstructed to the
> sound of the original. I think that fits any reasonable definition of
> "lossy compression" myself. Of course LC is usually done by computers
> using an algorithm, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done by other
> means. If it's compression and it involves loss of signal components
> as well then in my book that's "lossy compression". Whether it's done
> by a comuter running an algortihm or by re-recording on several
> generations of analogue tape is beside the point, so far as I can see.
One can argue anything and I was using the accepted definition of lossy
compression whereby a digital algorithm makes predetermined decisions about
what to throw away in the program material and when. By your definition,
anything which reduces the dynamic range, even by masking, is lossy
compression by virtue of the fact that information is lost by obfuscation.
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:51:30 -0700, eseedhouse@gmail,com wrote
(in article <fu11n2016kf@news1.newsguy,com >):
> On Apr 10, 5:46 pm, Sonnova <sonn...@audiosanatorium,com > wrote:
>>> Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
>>
>> no, several generations of analog tape would introduce analog compression if
>> any at all.
>
> And "analogue compression" is defined as ...?
>
> The concept of lossy compression exists only in the digital world
>
> And your evidence that this is so is....?
> > In a tape recording, each generation of tape causes noise to build-
> up,
>> distortion to build-up, and transients to become less and less distinct, but
>> unless the original recording was recorded wildly "hot" (consistently
>> driving the meters over "0" Vu), no actual compression is indicated.
>
> So it reduces the dynamic range and it cannot be reconstructed to the
> sound of the original. I think that fits any reasonable definition of
> "lossy compression" myself. Of course LC is usually done by computers
> using an algorithm, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done by other
> means. If it's compression and it involves loss of signal components
> as well then in my book that's "lossy compression". Whether it's done
> by a comuter running an algortihm or by re-recording on several
> generations of analogue tape is beside the point, so far as I can see.
One can argue anything and I was using the accepted definition of lossy
compression whereby a digital algorithm makes predetermined decisions about
what to throw away in the program material and when. By your definition,
anything which reduces the dynamic range, even by masking, is lossy
compression by virtue of the fact that information is lost by obfuscation.
Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
On Apr 14, 9:51 pm, eseedho...@gmail,com wrote:
> On Apr 10, 5:46 pm, Sonnova <sonn...@audiosanatorium,com > wrote:
>
> > > Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
>
> > no, several generations of analog tape would introduce analog compression if
> > any at all.
>
> And "analogue compression" is defined as ...?
Dynamic range reduction!
>
> The concept of lossy compression exists only in the digital world
Agreed
>
> And your evidence that this is so is....?
> > In a tape recording, each generation of tape causes noise to build-
> up,
>
> > distortion to build-up, and transients to become less and less distinct, but
> > unless the original recording was recorded wildly "hot" (consistently
> > driving the meters over "0" Vu), no actual compression is indicated.
>
> So it reduces the dynamic range and it cannot be reconstructed to the
> sound of the original. I think that fits any reasonable definition of
> "lossy compression" myself.
> Of course LC is usually done by computers
> using an algorithm, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done by other
> means. If it's compression and it involves loss of signal components
> as well then in my book that's "lossy compression". Whether it's done
> by a comuter running an algortihm or by re-recording on several
> generations of analogue tape is beside the point, so far as I can see.
What you describe is certainly lossy but it is not compression. There
has been no data reduction assuming that the frequency response is not
altered. Storage requirements remain the same.
On Apr 14, 9:51 pm, eseedho...@gmail,com wrote:
> On Apr 10, 5:46 pm, Sonnova <sonn...@audiosanatorium,com > wrote:
>
> > > Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy compression?
>
> > no, several generations of analog tape would introduce analog compression if
> > any at all.
>
> And "analogue compression" is defined as ...?
Dynamic range reduction!
>
> The concept of lossy compression exists only in the digital world
Agreed
>
> And your evidence that this is so is....?
> > In a tape recording, each generation of tape causes noise to build-
> up,
>
> > distortion to build-up, and transients to become less and less distinct, but
> > unless the original recording was recorded wildly "hot" (consistently
> > driving the meters over "0" Vu), no actual compression is indicated.
>
> So it reduces the dynamic range and it cannot be reconstructed to the
> sound of the original. I think that fits any reasonable definition of
> "lossy compression" myself.
> Of course LC is usually done by computers
> using an algorithm, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done by other
> means. If it's compression and it involves loss of signal components
> as well then in my book that's "lossy compression". Whether it's done
> by a comuter running an algortihm or by re-recording on several
> generations of analogue tape is beside the point, so far as I can see.
What you describe is certainly lossy but it is not compression. There
has been no data reduction assuming that the frequency response is not
altered. Storage requirements remain the same.
Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
<eseedhouse@gmail,com > wrote in message
news:ftk21702j91@news4.newsguy,com
> On Apr 8, 7:33 pm, bob <nabo...@hotmail,com > wrote:
>
>>> The only thing that I find destructive to the sound of
>>> real music is lossy compression.
>
>> Seriously, you find that more destructive than, say,
>> multiple generations of analog tape? (
>
> Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy
> compression?
Actually, several generations of analog tape induce several kinds of signal
loss without any beneficial compression.
Every generation of analog tape adds significant noise and both static and
dynamic frequency response variations. Audible amounts of nonlinear
distortion of several kinds are also added.
ABX tests can clearly detect the difference between an origional recording
and the first generation copy, even when the analog recording process is
very carefully controlled, using the best equipment.
http :// www .provide,net /~djcarlst/abx_tapg.htm
<eseedhouse@gmail,com > wrote in message
news:ftk21702j91@news4.newsguy,com
> On Apr 8, 7:33 pm, bob <nabo...@hotmail,com > wrote:
>
>>> The only thing that I find destructive to the sound of
>>> real music is lossy compression.
>
>> Seriously, you find that more destructive than, say,
>> multiple generations of analog tape? (
>
> Wouldn't several generations of analog tape induce lossy
> compression?
Actually, several generations of analog tape induce several kinds of signal
loss without any beneficial compression.
Every generation of analog tape adds significant noise and both static and
dynamic frequency response variations. Audible amounts of nonlinear
distortion of several kinds are also added.
ABX tests can clearly detect the difference between an origional recording
and the first generation copy, even when the analog recording process is
very carefully controlled, using the best equipment.
http :// www .provide,net /~djcarlst/abx_tapg.htm
Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
The best sound IMO is a live band in a good sounding room with only a PA
system for vocals, no mics on the drums or amps. Pure, ambient sound.
bob wrote:
> On Apr 6, 8:58 pm, Terry <terry75...@yahoo,com > wrote:
>> I have several MP3's that I've downloaded and want to
>> copy them to my RX-505.
>> If analog is suppose to give a warmer better sound, wouldn't
>> it have to be analog to analog copy from a record
>> instead of digital to analog copy from a computer to get that warm
>> analog sound?
>
> If by "that analog sound," you mean tape hiss, high-frequency rolloff,
> and wobbly wow & flutter, then you're in luck. Putting your newly
> acquired MP3s on cassette will give you all of those things!
>
> If what you're really after is "that vinyl sound"--surface noise, pops
> & clicks, W&F, phase distortion, frequency response anomalies,
> tracking error (have I missed anything?)--then you do indeed have to
> start with a vinyl disk.
>
> bob
The best sound IMO is a live band in a good sounding room with only a PA
system for vocals, no mics on the drums or amps. Pure, ambient sound.
bob wrote:
> On Apr 6, 8:58 pm, Terry <terry75...@yahoo,com > wrote:
>> I have several MP3's that I've downloaded and want to
>> copy them to my RX-505.
>> If analog is suppose to give a warmer better sound, wouldn't
>> it have to be analog to analog copy from a record
>> instead of digital to analog copy from a computer to get that warm
>> analog sound?
>
> If by "that analog sound," you mean tape hiss, high-frequency rolloff,
> and wobbly wow & flutter, then you're in luck. Putting your newly
> acquired MP3s on cassette will give you all of those things!
>
> If what you're really after is "that vinyl sound"--surface noise, pops
> & clicks, W&F, phase distortion, frequency response anomalies,
> tracking error (have I missed anything?)--then you do indeed have to
> start with a vinyl disk.
>
> bob
Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?
"Terry" <terry75115@yahoo,com > wrote in message
news:ftbrk302rde@news1.newsguy,com ...
>I have several MP3's that I've downloaded and want to
> copy them to my RX-505.
> If analog is suppose to give a warmer better sound, wouldn't
> it have to be analog to analog copy from a record
> instead of digital to analog copy from a computer to get that warm
> analog sound?
>
> Terry
What is a "warm analogue sound"? How does it differ from any other sort of
sound?
Copying from MP3 to cassette, the main limitation will most probably be the
cassette. MP3s if done at a decent data rate (>128kbps) will have better
performance than analogue cassette tape, even one as good as a Nakamichi
RX-505. What you will end up with is a recording that at it's best could be
indistinguishable from the original, but most likely will have worse
frequency response at both bass and treble end, higher noise, compression at
higher levels especially in the high treble and higher distortion on peaks.
If that's a "warm analogue sound", then that's what you'll get.
I used to line up Nakamichis before sale many years ago, and although they
were pretty good straight from the factory, they could be made to give much
better performance if they were lined up for one specific tape.
S.
--
http :// audiopages.googlepages,com
"Terry" <terry75115@yahoo,com > wrote in message
news:ftbrk302rde@news1.newsguy,com ...
>I have several MP3's that I've downloaded and want to
> copy them to my RX-505.
> If analog is suppose to give a warmer better sound, wouldn't
> it have to be analog to analog copy from a record
> instead of digital to analog copy from a computer to get that warm
> analog sound?
>
> Terry
What is a "warm analogue sound"? How does it differ from any other sort of
sound?
Copying from MP3 to cassette, the main limitation will most probably be the
cassette. MP3s if done at a decent data rate (>128kbps) will have better
performance than analogue cassette tape, even one as good as a Nakamichi
RX-505. What you will end up with is a recording that at it's best could be
indistinguishable from the original, but most likely will have worse
frequency response at both bass and treble end, higher noise, compression at
higher levels especially in the high treble and higher distortion on peaks.
If that's a "warm analogue sound", then that's what you'll get.
I used to line up Nakamichis before sale many years ago, and although they
were pretty good straight from the factory, they could be made to give much
better performance if they were lined up for one specific tape.
S.
--
http :// audiopages.googlepages,com
