196

16459 readers

33 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

653

Sacrilege rule (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

117 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 43 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (11 children)

To think that analog mediums are superior to digital requires a fundamental misunderstanding of signals and the human range of hearing that you can only get from ~~placebo enthusiasts~~ "audiophiles"

(I am by no means shitting on actual audiophiles btw. I consider myself an amateur audiophile.)

Edit: should also clarify I'm not shitting on people who enjoy records. I'm shitting on people who strictly think analog is better than digital.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

A pure analog recording can be superior to digital recordings. But those are so rare these days, we don't have a good comparison.

There's things like "bass bleed" and cross talk that made analog so interesting to listen to.

As long as the original recording is 48kHz or higher, digital recordings are awesome. We might not be able to hear beyond the 20Hz - 20kHz, you can most certainly feel it. Especially in the lower end.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

As long as the original recording is 48kHz or higher, digital recordings are awesome. We might not be able to hear beyond the 20Hz - 20kHz, you can most certainly feel it.

Someone hasn't heard of the Nyquist theorem :)

load more comments (9 replies)