5 ms·

Depends on how you think about it. From a data perspective, digital definitely captures less information than analog. We’re talking about the difference between

by jcpst 4y ago

Depends on how you think about it. From a data perspective, digital definitely captures less information than analog. We’re talking about the difference between discrete (digital) and contiguous (analog) data. I agree with saying that digital more accurately reproduces that data, because of the playback technology used. Digital audio requires applying “jitter” to the signal. In other terms, it is random noise applied to the digital data stream to “smooth out” the discrete differences between one sample to the next. The thing people find pleasing about analog is the inaccuracies in the playback, in the form of harmonic distortion. I like that harmonic distortion btw, but love digital for clarity.

NotYourLawyer 4y ago
> digital definitely captures less information than analog If your sampling frequency is high enough, digital captures the signal perfectly. Analog captures less of that signal, and a bunch of noise.
- kazinator 4y ago
  Neither is true. Whether a digital or analog channel carries more information and less noise depends entirely on the channel parameters. An ideal analog channel is noise-free and has infinite frequency response. An ideal digital channel carries infinite bits per second (and can be carried by the former analog channel). All digital communications is ultimately carried in an analog medium: e.g. twisted pair ethernet cable or what have you. The performance of that communication is within the limits established by the analog container. The simple analog coding techniques, though, are inflexible with regard to reallocating noise. E.g. an analog channel is noisy, we can use it to transmit digital information that is noise free, such as UTF-8 text. We reallocate the noise into a bandwidth limitation.
kazinator 4y ago
Digital does not definitely capture less information that analog. It depends on the exact parameters of the digital and analog channels being compared. We have the math which tells you, for a given set of analog channel parameters, how much information it can carry (bits per second) as a theoretical maximum. If you pick a digital channel which exceeds that bits per second value, it is better than that analog one. > Digital audio requires applying “jitter” to the signal. It is in fact magnetic tape audio recording that adds jitter, in the form of the bias signal: a high frequency signal mixed with the recorded material, which degausses the tape so that it gets magnetized in a linear way, proportional to the signal. Without the degaussing jitter of the bias signal, the quality will be very poor due to hysteresis. What you're referring to is dither. I don't think it's required when the A/D conversion has a resolution that is better than the noise floor of the signal being sampled. I suspect it's beneficial in crude applications like eight bit telephony.

by jcpst 4y ago

NotYourLawyer 4y ago

> digital definitely captures less information than analog If your sampling frequency is high enough, digital captures the signal perfectly. Analog captures less of that signal, and a bunch of noise.

kazinator 4y ago
Neither is true. Whether a digital or analog channel carries more information and less noise depends entirely on the channel parameters. An ideal analog channel is noise-free and has infinite frequency response. An ideal digital channel carries infinite bits per second (and can be carried by the former analog channel). All digital communications is ultimately carried in an analog medium: e.g. twisted pair ethernet cable or what have you. The performance of that communication is within the limits established by the analog container. The simple analog coding techniques, though, are inflexible with regard to reallocating noise. E.g. an analog channel is noisy, we can use it to transmit digital information that is noise free, such as UTF-8 text. We reallocate the noise into a bandwidth limitation.

kazinator 4y ago

Digital does not definitely capture less information that analog. It depends on the exact parameters of the digital and analog channels being compared. We have the math which tells you, for a given set of analog channel parameters, how much information it can carry (bits per second) as a theoretical maximum. If you pick a digital channel which exceeds that bits per second value, it is better than that analog one. > Digital audio requires applying “jitter” to the signal. It is in fact magnetic tape audio recording that adds jitter, in the form of the bias signal: a high frequency signal mixed with the recorded material, which degausses the tape so that it gets magnetized in a linear way, proportional to the signal. Without the degaussing jitter of the bias signal, the quality will be very poor due to hysteresis. What you're referring to is dither. I don't think it's required when the A/D conversion has a resolution that is better than the noise floor of the signal being sampled. I suspect it's beneficial in crude applications like eight bit telephony.