4 ms·

Your statement that CDs have a very limited number of bits is false by every known objective measure (compared to any prior consumer analog medium). CDs afford

Your statement that CDs have a very limited number of bits is false by every known objective measure (compared to any prior consumer analog medium). CDs afford a bit depth of 16, while tape provides at most 6, and vinyl at most 12. See this great video by signal engineers for more info: https://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml https://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml I suspect this is a classic case of "you think you want X, but what you actually want is your youth."

TylerE 8y ago
Your statements about tape and vinyl are ludicrous and unsourced. What do you think most of your CDs were recorded on in the first place? (Hint: tape)
- mrob 8y ago
  The 6 bits worth of SNR (36dB) for tape does sound implausibly low, even for consumer grade compact cassettes. And professional 1/2" reel-to-reel could do substantially better, although still worse than CD quality.
- function_seven 8y ago
  Not defending the bit depths in parent comment, but the tape a professional recording is made on and a cassette tape (which I assume parent meant by "tape") are a lot different, right? In any case, I've heard some great sound from Type II and Type IV cassette tapes in the past. The worst part was that tapes I made myself from CD sounded way better than a store-bought cassette of the same album. That's when I learned they really cheaped out on those cassettes (brown-colored Type I tapes)
  - TylerE 8y ago
    It’s not that different. Usually 1/2” or 1” wide and run at a faster speed but the chemistry is the same.
    - function_seven 8y ago
      Doesn't running faster and having that extra width have the effect of giving more physical space on the tape to the changes in magnetization? And therefore wider frequency range or more stable differences in amplitude? Sort of like how SP (2 hour) on a VHS tape looks much better than LP (4 hour) or ELP (6 hour).
      - TylerE 8y ago
        It does, but plenty of albums have been recorded on 4 track machines to 1/4" tape. The real difference in quality is probably mostly in having a machine that's properly setup and calibrated, with a good transport to minimize flutter, etc.
- mnw21cam 8y ago
  Yeah, my brother worked in a fairly antiquated recording studio about 10 years ago, and they had 24-bit 96kHz ADCs right next to the microphones, with digital lines carrying the sound data to be recorded onto a computer. All sound processing was performed in this format, with the final mix then being down-sampled to CD format. This is like when people complain that FM always sounds so much better than the newfangled digital radio, without realising that the station signal was transferred to the transmission stations in digital form, often at lower bit-rate than the newfangled digital radio. People like the nice familiar sound of low quality audio. Lots of audio equipment deliberately adulterates the sound to "make it sound better".

TylerE 8y ago

Your statements about tape and vinyl are ludicrous and unsourced. What do you think most of your CDs were recorded on in the first place? (Hint: tape)

mrob 8y ago
The 6 bits worth of SNR (36dB) for tape does sound implausibly low, even for consumer grade compact cassettes. And professional 1/2" reel-to-reel could do substantially better, although still worse than CD quality.
function_seven 8y ago
Not defending the bit depths in parent comment, but the tape a professional recording is made on and a cassette tape (which I assume parent meant by "tape") are a lot different, right? In any case, I've heard some great sound from Type II and Type IV cassette tapes in the past. The worst part was that tapes I made myself from CD sounded way better than a store-bought cassette of the same album. That's when I learned they really cheaped out on those cassettes (brown-colored Type I tapes)
- TylerE 8y ago
  It’s not that different. Usually 1/2” or 1” wide and run at a faster speed but the chemistry is the same.
  - function_seven 8y ago
    Doesn't running faster and having that extra width have the effect of giving more physical space on the tape to the changes in magnetization? And therefore wider frequency range or more stable differences in amplitude? Sort of like how SP (2 hour) on a VHS tape looks much better than LP (4 hour) or ELP (6 hour).
    - TylerE 8y ago
      It does, but plenty of albums have been recorded on 4 track machines to 1/4" tape. The real difference in quality is probably mostly in having a machine that's properly setup and calibrated, with a good transport to minimize flutter, etc.
mnw21cam 8y ago
Yeah, my brother worked in a fairly antiquated recording studio about 10 years ago, and they had 24-bit 96kHz ADCs right next to the microphones, with digital lines carrying the sound data to be recorded onto a computer. All sound processing was performed in this format, with the final mix then being down-sampled to CD format. This is like when people complain that FM always sounds so much better than the newfangled digital radio, without realising that the station signal was transferred to the transmission stations in digital form, often at lower bit-rate than the newfangled digital radio. People like the nice familiar sound of low quality audio. Lots of audio equipment deliberately adulterates the sound to "make it sound better".