I would put the 'problem' slightly differently, It is that any 'analog'
system which has no accompanying error detection and correction
mechanisms...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A TT/Arm/Cart doesn't have any error detection or correction mechanisms does
it? (I am deliberately excluding 'bias' here as, correct me if I'm wrong
,
I don't think you are referring to this and besides, this is another can of
worms that I have no desire to open.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...tends to end up with a level of performance which strongly depends on
how
well each specific instance was designed and made.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree in so far as some will be better designed and manufactured and thus
will presumably do a better job than the poorly designed 'Friday afternoon
special'!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus there are some LPs and LP playing systems which can deliver better
results than others simply as a result of being made and used with
particular care and skill.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree here too, but the best mechanical design coupled with the greatest
care in manufacture will still obey, and be restricted/hampered by, the laws
of physics.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On this basis the advantage of 'digital' systems is that their ability to
carry information is not so linearily dependent on avoiding small
imperfections. One example has already been mentioned. That an otherwise
well made CD can have a 1mm hole in it, yet reproduce the same waveforms
as
if the hole hadn'y been made. Whereas I doubt many people would have the
courage to even try playing an LP with a 1mm hole drilled into the playing
area of the disc. :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't put money on it!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In principle, we could have made 'better' analog systems. e.g. used a
higher playing rotation rate, etc. But this would sacrifice playing time
for other factors. i.e. a trade-off of the kind familiar to engineers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, higher rotational speeds would improve (but not alleviate) things in
some areas (the inertia problem for one) but, as you quite rightly state,
worsen them in others (increased noise, heat, wear for example).
It would seriously have to whiz around before Newtonian laws of motion gave
out (and Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity kicked in)!
Even I think that would be taking things a little to far!
if for no other
reason than an LP would only play for a billionth of a nano second or so
(wild guess). I accept that those who have severe restrictions on available
listening time may wish to disagree
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My experience is that I have some LPs that actually sound very good. These
are the ones that were well made, and have remained undamaged, and where
the recording didn't 'push the limits' of the system. But with CDs the
situation I experience is that I rarely encounter quality problems due to
the physical CD. Any problems tend to be because the orginal recording
made
onto the CD was deficient in some way. So, for example, if I hear
background noise or distortion when playing a CD I tend to suspect that
this was what was placed onto it, and isn't due to a physical imperfection
of the CD itself. Whereas if I hear background noise on an LP I suspect
that EMI had decided it was cheaper to pop the LP out of the press before
the surface had properly formed. :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I too have some LPs that I consider to be very good indeed. Joan
Armatrading's efforts for example will be familiar to many I am sure. Dave
Grusin's offerings are, in my opinion, truly outstanding (although I believe
he does, or at least did, favour digital). Those not familiar with his work
may care to give it a try. Many will not agree with me but those that do may
well find the need to take another look at the use of a digital source in
the studio. Of course, I find the CD versions to be even better!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly, the level achieved is satisfactory for many. It isn't for me,
especially as other methods are demonstrably better. I would disagree
with you when you state '...imperfections and limitations that stem from
design'. I would guess that any half reasonable design would, through
necessity, have been conceived only after careful consideration of known
principles and material properties.
Indeed, but the primary purpose of most music carriers isn't actually
'superb fidelity'. It is to make units that sell in large enough numbers
for the owners of the record companies to be able to buy large cigars.
:-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, but, given the overwhelming evidence, would you not agree that a
better, more capable product will be had with CD? The owners who embrace CD
would also get through more cigars I'll wager. However, within my humble
home studio setup I can afford (not financially unfortunately) to take the
time and expend as much effort and care as possible to get the best results
I can with the resources available to me. This is precisely why I will only
use digital.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FWIW My personal concerns for some years have been mainly with areas like
the design and use of speakers. Compared with the problems in that area, I
have no real worries about CD-A that are on a similar scale. Nice that
DVD-V's of concerts tend to have 48 ks/sec LPCM, though.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is clear that all components in the chain are immensely important if
fidelity, rather than a 'type' of sound, is the goal. However, if the
source (at the creation, mastering or retrieval phase) is poor then GIGO!
There can be no recovery. Unless high quality garbage is the goal, there is
little point in striving for improvements in other areas of the system.
Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
amazing miracle device
Linear Mode
