[Steven Sullivan]

mike mueller wrote:
This is rec.audio.high-end? Correct?
Too the average listener, he or she will not be able hear the difference
between analog or digital. And yes they are very happy with that.

Two of the subejcts on the TV show were introduced as 'golden ear'
recording engineers. In aggregate they did no better than chance (though
there was no breakdown into individual scores)

It's
just a simple fact. Yes, if you play a LP for them, they can hear a few
pops and clicks and tell which was the LP and which was the CD. Play a
analog recording on tape against a CD and you will hear a big
difference.

Play a CD recording of that analog tape, and you probably won't.

My recording of Oh Brother Where Art Thou sounds completely
different on CD that it does on the LP.

That's due to a combination of different mastering and the inherent colorations
of LP playback.

And those who have listened at
my house can hear the difference and like the LP better.
However, someone with a better "ear" can distinguish Red book from
Analog. Isn't that what High End Audio is about? If digital was better
than analog, why do studio's still record masters on Analog Tape instead
of DAT. Why do musicians still want wind instruments recorded on analog
tape instead of DAT.

DAT? Studios generally record to hard disc these days. And classical producers and musicians
were among the earliest and most fervent adopters of digital recordings.

Analog is what the human ear hears. It's natural with all the 3rd and
4th order harmonics the brain senses yet we can not hear.
Thank you

The audible output of any digital playback system is...analog. And an LP
most certainly does not accurately transmit all the '3 and 4th order harmonics'
of the 20-20kHz range.

___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason