On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Matt White wrote:
Hi,
> > This seems to be a matter of belief. I don't believe it, but then I'm an
> > Electronic Engineer, and therefore hopelessly blinkered.
>
> Okay, then here's the technical reason: CDs are sampled at an
> insufficient rate to ensure proper reproduction. CDs are sampled at
> 44.1kHz, which gives a maximum frequency of 20kHz. Significant portions
> of the populace can actually audibly detect frequencies up to 25kHz. It
mmm... I guess those "significant" portions of the populace
doesn't mind about media sampling rates, and aren't a target market; in
addition, it happens that people worried about such things are in the age
of being actually losing their top frequencies hearing. Don't trust
everything the marketing claims to sell its products.
Almost all "canned" music media, including CDs, don't reach all
the dynamic range potential. But even if this were improved, it wouldn't
carry much benefit, as the other components in the chain (amps, speakers)
are also limited, and you will always get the sound quality of the weakest
component of the chain.
The only way of improving that in whole is by means of actively crossoving
frecuencies, which is a rather expensive way, so having multiple already
filtered frecuency channels on the media, and specific amps/speakers for
its reproduction (as it's already happening on home theater systems) will
be much cheaper and effective.
> is unknown what subconcious effect the missing frequencies might have on
> those who do not detect those frequencies explicitly.
The subsconcious effect that makes people say that vinyl sounds
better than CDs are closely related with dynamics; analog media is more
tolerant with level saturation than digital. Analog multitrack systems
are still used on recordings of percussion instruments for example.
The sound manipulations that must be done to realiably store something on
a CD or any digital media in general (compressors, gates, etc) is what
makes poorly recorded (most) CDs to sound "flat". Compressing is very
difficult. Take any track of groovy CD that sounds decently (e.g.
Jamiroquai's 2 latest albums) into a wave editor, and you'll see what a
good example of an antonishing compression job is.
> This is one of the motivations behind SACD and DVD-Audio, which sample at
> 96kHz, if my memory is correct.
Whoa, then there must be people whose frecuency range exceeds
40kHz? man, that people must be on the Guiness...
greets,
*****---(*)---**********************************************---------->
Francisco J. Montilla System & Network administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED] irc: pukka Seville Spain
INSFLUG (LiNUX) Coordinator: www.insflug.org - ftp.insflug.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
