shauns@vice.UUCP (Shaun Simpkins) (11/28/83)
Oh, Gawd... Are we really getting into the dogs and bats argument again?
The tests mentioned (live baffled vs. live direct musicians) cut off the high
end response way below 20KHz, and probably way below 10KHz - and this in an
era when the medium was hard pressed to reach 7KHz. Of course it made
a difference - we can actually hear 10KHz. Now what this has to do with the
20KHz rolloff of CDs is beyond me.
For all youse people that are still swayed by Linn Sondek's arguments, the
latest issue of Audio has a very interesting article by Les Burwen entitled
``Confessions of a Digital Recordist''. This guy is SERIOUS about quality
reproduction, and makes some very high caliber NR systems and line amplifiers
through his company, Burwen Research. The upshot of the article was that the
digital system he was using (Sony PCM F-1) sounded different and not as rich
and full as his analog system BECAUSE OF INACCURACIES IN THE ANALOG SYSTEM.
These errors amounted to +-1dB changes in the bass and treble, easily
measurable and correctable. No other anomalies were noted save a slightly
higher noise floor for the digital machine (!). As many other articles have
noted, microphone techniques had to be slightly modified.
--
Shaun Simpkins
uucp: {ucbvax,decvax,chico,pur-ee,cbosg,ihnss}!teklabs!tekcad!vice!shauns
CSnet: shauns@tek
ARPAnet:shauns.tek@rand-relay