Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

Above about 50kHz the main output from SACD will be the 'hash' from the 1
bit noise shaping scheme. I don't think Philips really want us to hear
that...

I'd be interested to know how they'd force us to hear it even if they
wanted to :)

Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

Although as John has pointed out, there is some work that shows that
'ultrasound' may have audible effects at times.

I read a fascinating article once about church organs with ultrasonic
pipes in them. Apparently the audience can eb affected emotionally
despite being unbale to actually hear the sound.

Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

A while back I made a reference to a woolly memory of something I had
read in HFW to do with Tim de P's views on bitrates and their vinyl
equivalents and said I would post a reference to it, if it ever
appeared. Well it's popped up out of the blue and is, of course, nothing
like I remembered it.

It's on 2 pages of the April 2004 edition:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit.../article01.jpg

plus the top left paragraph he

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit.../article02.jpg


The 'bitrates' are nothing to do with vinyl it seems - simply Tim De
P's idea of a minimum requirements for digital to come even close.


so Tim de P reckons that digital should be 24/400, eh?
Most people can't hear above 20kHz, and 400kHz would allow signals with
frequency content of up to 200kHz be reproduced perfectly. A bit of a
waste, isn't it? Though 200kHz would better capture the harmonics of a
square/triangle wave.

**16/44 digital can't even reproduce a decent 5kHz square wave. Such a
feat is a doddle for a good vinyl system. Do you think you can hear the
difference between a 5kHz square wave and a 5kHz sine wave? Hint: You
probably can.


24-bit resolution would imply a dynamic range of 144dB. That's pretty
loud!


Now, having said all this, I still have another memory that there are
some pretty impressive figures somewhere that compare vinyl 'information
flow' very favourably with digital bitrates, but I've no idea where from
and have no intention of trying to find out. - I don't need to,


Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as well
(cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The mighty
Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave performance of
this very fine cartridge is exemplary.


Isn't the extra "frequency content" associated with vinyl a byproduct of
the mechanical replay system?

**In poor systems, yes. In good systems, no.



OK Mr Wilson, that was rather neatly done - I have to admit that....

Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as
well (cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The
mighty Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave
performance of this very fine cartridge is exemplary.

Just where are you going to get the source material to cut on this disk?
Or are you restricting it to direct cut?

--
*If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:59:30 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton used
to say...

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:23:17 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:10:22 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton used
to say...

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:40:05 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:42:03 +0000, Paul Dormer used
to say...

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

And we're all well aware that 'crazy Tim'is not fully
resident on planet Earth. Typical valvie, on current
evidence............

He still has far more credibility in the biz than you have
Pinky.

Prove it.

Prove that you are not mentally ill.

1) Arny is kill filed, he knows it so WTF he's replying I have no
idea.

2) I wonder which firm I should contact first to ask if they even
know of Pinky much less consider him credible.

RBos,

Do they make amps, DVD players, CD players et al?

PERA, Borealis Exploration, Hughes Microelectronics (now part of
Raytheon), or Marconi Instruments, for a few.

So where do they come under the 'biz' banner?

They don't, which was my entire point regarding my CV, which mostly
concerns precision electronics *vastly* more demanding than domestic
audio. Know any domestic gear that can detect a submarine's distinct
sonic signature at 2,000 miles?

I would be more impressed with its relevance if it could reproduce a
submarine's distinct sonic signature at 2,000 miles?.

You're playing with words. In order to detect a sonic signiture, you have to
reproduce it.

Basically you're full of ****. You think because you can do one thing
it automatically gives you the ability to do another.

Letsee Kurt, what is the other thing that YOU can do besides whine about
vinyl and tubes?

You're just an amateur who thinks he can do a professional's job but
have never had the bottle to actually do it.

As compared to you Kurt who never even tried?

Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as
well (cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The
mighty Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave
performance of this very fine cartridge is exemplary.

Just where are you going to get the source material to cut on this disk?
Or are you restricting it to direct cut?

**Direct cut, of course. Commercial LPs were all pretty much crap.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...


OK Mr Wilson, that was rather neatly done - I have to admit that....


**Thank you.

Now, let's get back to arguing.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Just where are you going to get the source material to cut on this disk?
Or are you restricting it to direct cut?

**Direct cut, of course. Commercial LPs were all pretty much crap.

They certainly were until digital mastering arrived. Then perked up
somewhat. Not much point in direct cut after that.

--
*Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

"Kurt Hamster" wrote


Basically you're full of ****. You think because you can do one thing it
automatically gives you the ability to do another.


It does, he gets to stuff envelopes apparently.....



You're just an amateur who thinks he can do a professional's job but
have never had the bottle to actually do it.


I think you'll find the 'professions' are also pretty good at spotting
amateurs and ****ters, so it might be more a question of getting a real
opportunity. Not a problem to anyone with real balls - they set their own
opportunities up and take control of their lives....

(Arguably not worth the bother this day and age though, if you have no
problem sucking it up from *superiors*...???)

Vinyl 'bitrates'
 

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
In a sense this is largely correct because acostic instruments
effectively work in the analog domain. There are technical losses in
conversion to digital, even when they are inaudible. However, simply
amplifiying and processing analog also involves technical losses.
Analog really falls apart when you try to distribute it widely.

Recording analogue is the main problem. No method exists that even gets
near the performance of even a modest amplifier, etc.

--
*(over a sketch of the titanic) "The boat sank - get over it

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.