RE: Ask an Audio geek
April 17, 2016 at 2:09 am
(This post was last modified: April 17, 2016 at 2:41 am by Alex K.)
Concerning the magical math you say is guesswork, and the results not looking like a sine wave. Have you read anything I've written?
I don't think anyone claims that any technique on earth can make a *perfect* recording of a signal, be it analog or digital. I've already mentioned that for digital it needs to be limited to frequencies below half the sampling rate and that near the sampling rate there are problems because one cannot perfectly cut off a signal at some frequency. That the signal built from the digital needs to be sent through a second filter to properly cut frequencies again. That one can arbitrarily reduce these effects by oversampling. None of this is guesswork. A lot of people worked hard to understand these things, and they are understood.
You need to argue what it is you think analog can do better and why that difference is relevant.
I don't think anyone claims that any technique on earth can make a *perfect* recording of a signal, be it analog or digital. I've already mentioned that for digital it needs to be limited to frequencies below half the sampling rate and that near the sampling rate there are problems because one cannot perfectly cut off a signal at some frequency. That the signal built from the digital needs to be sent through a second filter to properly cut frequencies again. That one can arbitrarily reduce these effects by oversampling. None of this is guesswork. A lot of people worked hard to understand these things, and they are understood.
You need to argue what it is you think analog can do better and why that difference is relevant.
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
