rzdz@fluke.UUCP (Rick Chinn) (01/11/84)
re: digital recordings
I have had a chance to a/b a digital recording and an analog recording made
at the same time, using the same mics and electronics.
Yes, the digital machine won the s/n race hands down (didn't you expect
that). But it made the stage seem somewhat smaller.
A lot of us have theorized about what happens, but there is nothing concrete.
I suspect that it has something to do with quantization errors at *very low
levels*. I'm not so sure that you would hear the difference on more
contemporary musical forms, like rock and roll. What we heard was a
shallower, narrower stage, and a much drier hall.
The digital machine did *not* exhibit the *steeley, grainy* high-end that
many of those present expected.
You could hear the hiss on the analog recording (15 IPS, no noise reduction,
Nagra T-audio).
The kicker: We did this comparison on a *very* high quality system. This
system has spatial characteristics that defy description. I don't believe
that you could hear much of a difference (at least as far as stage width) on
a plain vanilla system. (receiver + bookshelf spkrs)
These are my opinions. Please direct flames to /dev/null. Civilized
discussion welcome.
Rick Chinn
John Fluke Mfg. Co MS 232E
PO Box C9090 Everett WA 98043
{uw-beaver,decvax!microsof,ucbvax!lbl-csam,allegra,ssc-vax}!fluke!rzdz
(206) 356-5232pmr@drufl.UUCP (Rastocny) (01/16/84)
I've experienced similar results (comparing two different digital sources). I don't understand exactly what is going on either. Comments anyone? (As if I had to ask.) Yours for higher fidelity, Phil Rastocny AT&T-ISL ..!drufl!pmr