Re: digital vs analog?

[Dave Stagner <dstagner@icarus.net>]

On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Olivier Malhomme wrote:

> 
> A lot of people say "I gotta say I *hate* the
> cold, lifeless sound of most digital processors". That's funny, because
> i've challenged a lot of so-called musician, self-appointed golden ears,
> after public statement about digital coldness to make a blind test at my
> home. Some answered positively. None in  a blind test could clearly
> identify digital from a good analog (TDK cassette as well as 1/2 inch
> tape)...

You forgot to say "good digital" as well.  Believe me, even tin ears
can pick out BAD digital.  I've owned bad digital devices, and for too
long I looped with 'em (Boss and Digitech stomp boxes).  

Really, I'm not saying this as some technophobic Luddite Neanderthal
guitarist.  I have enough software and electronics background to
understand pretty well the issues involved in A/D and D/A conversion
(not to mention the issues of analog recording and reproduction).  I
also have enough business experience to know the sort of shoddy work
and shortcuts that dominate the production of real devices.  I studied
recording technology in a high-end 24 track studio, and did
side-by-side masters on DAT and $8000 Studer half-track.  My ears are
well-trained and educated, and I think I'm qualified to make informed
opinions.  

Opinion #1 - Comparing digital and analog on a *cassette* is hardly
fair, is it?  The cassette smudges the sound so badly you can't expect
to get more than the barest outline.  Half-track is somewhat fairer,
but will still go a long way to sweeten the upper midrange harshness
of so many digital effects.  

Opinion #2 - A/D methodology is highly relevant.  I love the sound of
my obsolete Echotron with its 1 bit PCM conversion, even though it is
supposedly inferior to modern "CD Quality" effects.  It's not just the
quantity of coloration, but the quality too. 

Opinion #3 - Many digital effects sound "cold" and "harsh" because of
poor quality A/D and D/A circuitry that only counts bits and sample
rates, missing many other factors that influence the overall sound.
Too often, the problems are in the analog front and back ends
(although you'll never hear the analog purists say that!)

Opinion #4 - Given 2 and 3 above, sound quality cannot be judged by
specs alone.  This is why my Lexicon gear sounds significantly better
than the 24 bit blah blah woof woof ART/Alesis/Zoom/Digitech crap it
competes with, despite the theoretically limited bandwidth and dynamic
range.  

-dave

By "beauty," I mean that which seems complete.
Obversely, that the incomplete, or the mutilated, is the ugly. 
Venus De Milo.
To a child she is ugly.       
   -Charles Fort              dstagner@icarus.net