[geoff]

On 26/06/2014 1:04 a.m., William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ...

Back in the fifties, electronics got so good that the real
limitations were the speakers, the rooms, and the
distribution media.

What do you mean by "electronics"? I'd have to include the chain of
electronics preceding the distribution medium -- including the recorder.

There's no question digital recording is closer to "the truth" than
analog. And I have little doubt that mics and related recording
electronics have gotten less-inaccurate over the past 50 years. But it
wasn't until multi-ch SACD came along that I heard //commercial//
recordings that could stand comparison with live sound.

The medium is not //the// controlling factor in sound quality. SACDs
vary in quality (though the variation is far less than than among CDs).
The most-realistic commercial recordings I've ever heard are from the
digital-hatin' folks at Linn -- and it is not due solely to the fact
that they're on SACDs. Some of their high quality would be audible on
[crosses himself] -- phonograph records! [sound of screaming from a
cheap horror movie]


Speaker remain the weak link in the chain. An order of magnitude or two
more distorted and non-linear than everything else, even more than
phonygraph records !


geoff