re: Remasters vs. Vinyl

[Buckeye <buckeye@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 21 Nov 2001, Buddy Boy Page wrote:

> If I'm not mistaken, there's a theorem, Nyquit's, that
> goes something to the effect that if an electrical
> signal - say, varying voltage to represent sound - is
> sampled at twice it's highest frequency, the digitized
> copy should sound the same.  Or something like that,
> I'm sure someone will call me out on that.
> 

Nyquist's theorem - yes, you need to sample a waveform at at least 2X the
highest frequency to properly capture it.  This is why CDs are sampled at
44.1Khz - it gives you about 22Khz as the highest reproducable frequency.
They say that people can't hear any higher frequencies than about 20Khz.

Of course, things are much more complicated than this.  Our ears and our
brain are much more complicated than anything we can build.  The best
devices for music are what God gave us!  On paper, it seems that we can do
well in capturing music and playing it back.

> Is there any truth to vinyl sounding better, given the
> same sound system?
>

Given perfect equipment, perfect medium, I'll take analog any day!
However, CDs are just so convenient and they sound the same, time after
time!  I long for the good old days of analog, though!


Bruce the Buckeye, EE
  ______________________________________________________________________
   |         Bruce Deerhake    email: bruce@xxxxxxxxxxxx              |
   |       Your One-Stop-Site For Led Zeppelin on the Internet:       |
   |        Buckeye's Led Zep Page:  http://www.ledzeppelin.ws        |