Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site unc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!mcnc!unc!rentsch From: rentsch@unc.UUCP (Tim Rentsch) Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Re: Analog vs. Digital Challenge Message-ID: <6697@unc.UUCP> Date: Sat, 4-Feb-84 15:44:39 EST Article-I.D.: unc.6697 Posted: Sat Feb 4 15:44:39 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 8-Feb-84 07:28:37 EST References: <2427@utah-cs.UUCP> Organization: CS Dept., U. of N. Carolina at Chapel Hill Lines: 27 Wonderful proposal. I'm all in favor of it. Some problems remain: (1) funding (2) equipment (3) playback fidelity Point three is especially ticklish. What's the point of doing the test if it's going to be done on, e.g., Bose speakers? Getting accurate reproduction *after* the material being tested is crucial -- these days when I hear of an experiment which "proves" some claim about audio, the first question I ask On what equipment was the test done? The minimum here is amplifier and speakers. If that information isn't included, the test is worthless. Just by the way, if I hear again that CD's have "no information loss" I think I'll be sick. Some things to think about: (1) The nyquist limit applies only if the samples are *infinite* precision. Last time I checked 16 bits was far short of infinity. (2) The implicit claim is that there is no information content above 20kHz. Even if I grant that people can't hear sine waves above 20kHz (which I don't -- but that's another story) that does *not* mean that there is no information content above 20kHz. Tim Rentsch