Oh, brother, yes, it is appeal to authority, RELEVANT, ACTUAL authority, not some guy on the internet. As to your talking about cell phone dropout, tell me, then, what do you think the raw transmission error rate is when you start to get deep fades on the cell phone, but you can still talk?
Do tell, what's the raw error rate on that phone? You say "any errors at all". You have no idea what actually happens.
Do you know that at least one of the old DAR systems could support up to 25% bit errors WITHOUT ANY DATA DELIVERY ERROR? Do you know what an ECC is? Ever hear of Reed-Solomon coding? Or oversampled Reed-Solomon coding? How about trellis, punctured trellis, etc. There are many more, I haven't done anything around a modem since 2002, but it's clear you don't understand the basics.
I don't know what any of that is, none at all - and yet I still think the point I made stands. Digital is fragile in ways that analogue is not (or not as fragile, if you want to nit pick). Digital and analogue degrade differently and that much analogue media (records/books) will likely outlive digital; yes with damage, yes with imperfection, but data contained on that analogue media will be more readily retrievable and usable than that from digital media, when stored over long periods (10s/100s of years),
unless said digital storage media is maintained in way analogue is not (changing formats, multiple backups, converting from obsolete formats to current ones - you get the picture).
I can read a 100 year old book with relative ease, will people in the future be able to do so with a 100 year old hard drive or DVD-R (just as two examples).
That is the point I was making in my first post here:
You are wrong on many levels. Its technically not lossless. By that logic, recording a CD (like a cassette tape) is "lossless". I think you missed the point. I believe the person is saying that a capture of whatever is played, with "satisfying" sounds on an LP, by a digital recording, looses...
www.audiosciencereview.com
You are arguing against half-hearted technical points I make, but I'm not talking technicalities, but practicalities or reality.
If you want to argue technical details, then I concede immediately, but then why bother posting. If a discussion cannot be had with someone about details
other than purely technical ones, what is the point of posting on this forum? How many posters here will be able to match your technical knowledge, not I and not many others, but I wasn't even pretending to argue on that level.
If you want a discussion about something other than pure technical points, please respond to the last two paragraphs of this post:
One of my objections to vinyl is that it is just not suited to a lot of the music I listen to. The move to digital was hugely liberating for classical music enthusiasts as the overwhelming majority of symphonic recordings fit on a single CD and even longer works were a lot easier than if using...
www.audiosciencereview.com
If not, I concede to your greater technical knowledge. You win the debate, where I would have preferred a discussion; you won before it started, by arguing not against the thrust of my argument, but technical details of which you obviously have superior knowledge. On that count, I cannot possibly win, but I wasn't really looking to win as such, more just have a stimulating discussion.
Yours, some guy on the internet.