| Re: Blu-Ray vs DVD [message #65928 is a reply to message #65870] |
Tue, 01 February 2011 14:20   |
Adveser
Messages: 434
Registered: July 2009
Location: USA
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
The original master tapes converted to 24-bit digital audio would be far better than the original vinyl in my opinion. Personally, I don't hear any difference between a sampled sound and an actual original analog sound since there such a huge number of samples being taken that no matter what it is the digital conversion will be able to reproduce it accurately. That's sample rate though and anything above 48Khz is just going to give you either nothing or diminished returns. The bitrate is what is going to make it sound more accurate from an amplitude point of view.
I'm pretty skeptical about the claim that vinyl is the "original" sound even considering the RIAA equalization process and the intentional removal of frequencies vinyl can't handle because I just don't see a needle physically picking up thousands of delicate transients that appear when you look at a sound wave editor. I think vinyl does a very good job of getting "most" of the original intact.
Briefly without going into it too much, "original masters" are likely not original anymore, they have to put them in the oven and transfer them to new tape so it doesn't turn into adhesive. I have no idea how accurate this whole thing is though. What I have read seems to suggest it is "perfect."
Yeah, to sum everything up:
Original Master Tapes > 24-bit digital > Records = 16-bit digital > Cassette Tape > 192KBPS MP3 > 8-Track > 128KBPS MP3
http://adveser.webs.com/
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Get a T-Shirt!
