"Jim H" wrote in message
news

That's not to say analogue is ideal, there's a trade off between
analogue accuracy and digital precision.

I'm afraid those are only words without an explanation.

Expanation:

Contrary to popular belief the terms 'acuracy' and 'precision' are not
synonyms.

A digital signal may have perfect pcecision, that is, what is
transmitted/pressed is exactly what arrives. however that signal is
only
accurate to a certain degree. In the example of cd audio, an atomic
sound
is the nearest of about 65,000 options for that 1/44,000 of a second.

Now, for an analogue signal, the accuracy is perfect, the sound isn't
said
to be 'to the nearest x'.
Nice theory but how does that work in practice?
Don't analogue signals suffer all sorts of atenuation and distortion
once you attempt to propogate them?

I suppose you could argue that a record is 'to
the nearest atom of vinyl'
Only if the "resolution" of the mastering process is at an atomic level
and if you start to examine vinyl at an atomic level the actual playing
of the record will alter the shape of the groove simply because of
difference of the physical properties of diamond and vinyl.

but accuracy on that level is pretty much
irrelevent because an analogue copy is never totally precise - what is
transmitted or pressed will not be exactly the same as the original
and
with every copy the errors get worse.

Digital = perfect precision, limited accuracy.
Analogue = limited precision, perfect accuracy.

That's the tradeoff!

NB: I'm not saying anything about the superiority of the sound of
either
format here.



--
RobH
The future's dim, the future's mono.