My friend won't believe that analog is inherently superior to digital.
Can you help me convince him?
>>64574051
hes right you filthy rockist
it is not per se
it's not you're wrong tell my friend I said that
People think analog (eg vinyl) is better than digital (eg cd) because it sounds 'warmer'
it only sounds warmer though because it distorts lower frequencies
plus it's expensive as shit and degrades with each play
uncompressed digital costs nothing and has none of those problems
if you compress your music though when you rip it from a cd it's going to be worse than vinyl
>>64574146
Don't vinyl releases tend to have better dynamic range though?
>>64574235
it's only worth it if the CD is butchered
>>64574235
That's an issue of the mastering, not the medium.
The maximum dynamic range of vinyl is far worse than CDs.
And it only applies to pleb genres like rawk. Classical and Jazz CDs do not have the problem.
just tip your fedora at him
Well analog has unlimited depth or something like that whereas digital is often limited to 24 bits
>>64574849
Molecules have a finite size
>>64574051
yea but who has the time or money for Anolog? I wish I did, but I don't.
>>64574849
24 bits means that a signal level can be assigned to one of 16,777,216 different values. There's also sampling rate, but 44.1kHz or 48kHz is also enough (with the highest measured frequencies being ~22kHz and 24kHz, respectively, and human ear not heaering anything above ~20kHz). This is a lot and as far as modern psychoacoustics are concerned its absolutely enough. People like the "warm" sound, like >>64574146
said.
>>64574994
>People like the "warm" sound
Why doesn't anyone sell DSP that distorts and degrades digital audio so it sounds like vinyl?
"Best" of both worlds
>>64574051
>My friend won't believe that analog is inherently superior to digital.
It yes, why would it be better?
You are basically getting something X and transforming into something ultra similar Y
>>64574051
I feel like that pic needs to be switched. More often than not bands take credit for the work of the producer.
>>64575072
>listening to "band" music
>>64575010
there are already a lot of (free) tube amp DSPs and VSTs out there you can use.
Stop listening to pussy shit
>inherently superior
>implying wires, cylinders, flexi discs and cassettes has a higher fidelity than 24bit FLAC files.
I like the sound of old cassette tapes, but come on.
This is either bait, or you are just a teenager who doesn't know what you are talking about.
>>64575081
>listening to music at all
lmao get on my level pleb
>but muh analog warmth
it'll be fun seeing youtube-era kids grow up and be nostalgic for that low bitrate artefacting. then you'll start seeing records run through vintage LAME encoders at 128kbps and pressed to wax
>>64574146
all digital is compressed you fucking tool. keep listening to your shitty compressed mp3 files, meanwhile listening to my vinyl i hear EVERYTHING. every fucking sound, so much music is lost in digital.
look, its fine if you want to be a pleb and listen to digital, i dont condone it but i cant stop you doing what you want. youre too poor for vinyl - thats cool. but dont ever, ever talk bad about vinyl just because youre too much of a peasant to afford it.
vinyl is a superior sound so quit projecting
>>64574235
No. If the levels peak too high on a vinyl the needle will pop out of the track.
>>64575754
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
our ears can only hear so many frequencies, were not robots, theres no point listening to digital over analogue because our ears cant hear the benefits of it, it may technically be better, but analogue will always be better imo
>>64575898
what a great counter argument.
its a fact you notice more elements to a song on vinyl. keep listening to your compressed bullshit you faggot, i aint gonna stop you but dont mindlessly hate something that is objectively superior
>>64575110
You can make a plugin that looks like and old amp and claim it models a tube amp, but you're retarded if you think they're ever accurate.
>>64576155
>you're retarded if you think they're ever accurate.
Why do you think a DSP can't accurately model a vacuum tube?
>>64576396
I meant a tube amp with a tube power supple and hot iron. Not just one tube in a mic pre. There are so many variables to get right that most modeling doesn't break up the same way.
It's really easy to emulate certain analog stuff, like oscillators, preamp tubes, and 1/4" tape, but a tube power supply is a clusterfuck of nonlinearities.
here you go, retards
http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)
analog synths have nice textures.
just messing around lol
http://vocaroo.com/i/s04d9VvqoQYg
>>64576786
not the guy you're replying to but i wouldn't call oscillator modelling 'easy', unless you dgaf about aliasing
agree about tube psu though, not easy at all
>>64574849
>limited to 24 bits
>>64575754
well you have offically sold me on the notion that all vinyl enthusiasts are completely brain dead
>>64574051
I've discovered during the last two years, since I can take CD-Rs home from the mastering plant, that there's an astonishing variation in quality between different CD plants. If you think digital is perfect, I have news for you. Many of us have been fooled by this myth that it's just 0s and 1s and therefore copies perfectly. It doesn't. The variations in quality are pretty wild, and random. Just the way you hook up a cable can make a difference. And there's no quality control in these CD plants, other than someone checking whether there's any level being transferred.
>>64574860
nice pedantry
>>64577055
I would assume it's the same for vinyl then
So, the image on the left is old and falling apart and the one on the right is new and fresh...??
>>64574051
Why does the guy on the left have a cum splotch on his face?
>>64577055
The 1s and 0s don't change, you are describing the medium (the CD) and the output (the cable) and even the, they way you hook up a cable would effect any sound, analog or digital.
>>64577197
Also digital is perfect and assuming there is no problem with the software or computers involved will copy perfectly everytime
>>64574051
Tell him about placebo effect.
>>64575924
That isn't a reason to use analog
>>64574051
depends on the music but if you ask me digital electronic music is way fucking superior to analog today.
All the analog fags I know make boring fucking shit and just gush all day about muh analog synths. Meanwhile I make stuff with just a laptop that blows their shit out of the water.
You can do way more with digital that has never been done and you can get way more clarity and precision easily.
>>64574051
no; go away
>>64574295
■|:3
epic .gif, mind if I save it?
>>64574146
>and degrades with each play
Not if you have a good record player and take proper care of both the player and the record
it's not inherently superior but it is superior due to naturally damping resonant frequencies.
>>64576786
>is a clusterfuck of nonlinearities.
Why shouldn't it be possible to model a clusterfuck of nonlinearities?
>>64579489
You have no idea what model means, do you?
>>64574059
/thread
>>64574051
it doesnt matter, you can have high end analog gear and have it be as good as high end digital/vice versa but analog gear is too much work to take care of, and its easier to do more with digital that it is with analog
how hard is it for you autists to see that what you have isn't as important as how you use what you have
>>64574051
>2016
>not knowing that utilizing both analog and digital is obviously better than choosing one over the other
OMG where is the infographic showing the response times of speakers? Proponents of high bit rate music usually show the jagged vertical and horizontal only lines and how they correspond to the original analog wave. When we convert that digital date back into an analog format, as in we play the mp3 through a speaker so we can consume its media, the speaker can't replicate those jagged lines. What we get are smoothed out waves, not jagged waves. It's why you really don't need anything more than 320 kbps
>>64579549
>high end analog gear
The only somewhat affordable analog medium that barely reaches the dynamic range of CDs is studio tape. How are you going to get new music on tape?
Pretty much all other analog media are inferior, especially vinyl.
>>64577066
It's equivalently pedantic as saying "only 24 bit"
>>64579691
I'm talking about for recording you dipshit
>>64579504
A computational model of a physical phenomenon is the application of existing theories to simulate the behavior of a hypothetical device accurately, as it would behave if it were present in the corporeal realm.
What's so great about tube amplifiers anyway? They distort and degrade the input signal.
>>64579138
electronic music can be done with analog gear, but its way fucking harder to do something decent
I still think analog's cool though, especially for shoegaze lo-fi shit but recording in general is just a fucking chore with analog
>tfw fell for analog meme
>tfw can do way more in less time with a DAW
