All Digital is rubbish, only analogue is good enough

[crizdee]

Apparently!! from what i have been sent from a manufacturer of analogue and digital gear....


Common digital specifications are 24 bit/96 kHz. 24 bits provide enough dynamic resolution, but 96 kHz is far from being sufficient when it comes to time resolution: our hearing capabilities would require sample rates of around 500 kHz. Therefore, those small signal structures carrying spatial and location information are lost in digital mixing ― analog equipment clearly exceeds these demands.



Let the debate begin




Chris

[John_Toolbox]

Hilarious. Nothing else to debate other than how funny it is for a manufacturer to send out something like that to a professional audio engineer.

[albee1952]

All smoke and mirrors since 75% of today's music is delivered in mp3 format No song ever became a hit(or didn't) because of how it was recorded, or what format it was done on. A more accurate statement would be something like "most music is rubbish"......discuss(apologies to Linda Richman) Oy....I'm getting verklempt

[Dism]

Originally Posted by albee1952

All smoke and mirrors since 75% of today's music is delivered in mp3 format No song ever became a hit(or didn't) because of how it was recorded, or what format it was done on. A more accurate statement would be something like "most music is rubbish"......discuss(apologies to Linda Richman) Oy....I'm getting verklempt

Indeed.

Regardless of whether or not 96k is "good enough," it's almost never getting delivered to the consumer even at that high of quality.

The kids aren't buying records anymore.

[M-ManLA]

I sure do wish that music was delivered at 88.2 or 96k. We have the technology, but the powers that may be is holding everyone back.

[Benoni]

Originally Posted by crizdee

Apparently!! from what i have been sent from a manufacturer of analogue and digital gear....


Common digital specifications are 24 bit/96 kHz. 24 bits provide enough dynamic resolution, but 96 kHz is far from being sufficient when it comes to time resolution: our hearing capabilities would require sample rates of around 500 kHz. Therefore, those small signal structures carrying spatial and location information are lost in digital mixing ― analog equipment clearly exceeds these demands.



Let the debate begin




Chris

You are talking about SPL right. Advertising the new NEOS.

Most award-winning audio is mixed in analog.

Now analog just got better.

Compared to standard mixer designs, NEOS’ operational voltage is increased fourfold — more power means higher overall performance: more than 30 dB input headroom, 125 dB dynamic range, 100 dB S/N ratio.


Experience the NEOS demonstration at our stand 5.1/B82.

If you can not attend: http://www.spl.info/index.php?id=334&L=1


24 channel mixing and monitoring console

Compact 19 "/7 U housing format

Chain as many NEOS as you like
Ultimate mixing quality

Ultimate monitoring quality

Designed and handcrafted in Germany

Why is most award-winning audio mixed in analog?

Common digital specifications are 24 bit/96 kHz. 24 bits provide enough dynamic resolution, but 96 kHz is far from being sufficient when it comes to time resolution: our hearing capabilities would require sample rates of around 500 kHz. Therefore, those small signal structures carrying spatial and location information are lost in digital mixing ― analog equipment clearly exceeds these demands.

[John_Toolbox]

Most award-winning audio is mixed in analog.

This statement is true if you count all audio throughout the history of recording, simply because the majority of the time that recorded audio has been getting awards there was only analogue. A more accurate sales pitch would be:

Most award-winning audio released in the 20th century was mixed in analog.

I'll stick with digital.

[Benoni]

Originally Posted by John_Toolbox

I'll stick with digital.

me too.

[albee1952]

Its never been the tools. Its always been the talent and the song(except for those times when the tools "correct" the talent, which isn't really part of this discussion, and actually IS talent, just the engineer's and not the performer's). Sorry, I'll go away now

[daeron80]

I'm going back to bouncing cassette to cassette. The timing resolution was sooooooo much better. Oh, how I miss the timing resolution!

Seriously, though, Alan Sides has been known to make similar complaints about the timing resolution of digital audio. One of his reasons for preferring DSD for mix down from an analog console. There could be something to it. But, yeah, it's not gonna change record sales appreciably.