Is Digital Audio Transmission Analog? [video]

[Vacceo]

Very much so, potentially... but this is very general as it depends on the country. Here in Aus we still have AM/FM, DAB+ also in some the main cities, no analogue TV left though, all DTV now. All main station channels are required to have an SD version of the channel for those that may have older TV's and tuners that can't do HD or MPEG4. Most of these services are now also available online, although there will always be some people (elderly, disabled, remote locations, not wealthy etc.) that will always need access to some free and cheap form of receiving national news services. Especially in our rural areas where bush fires, droughts and floods can be common. Of course personally I hope none disappear.


JSmith

You essentially have the same issues we have here in Spain, though yours are applied to a far higher order of magnitude: rural areas and isolation. Over here, DAB is esentially irrelevant (around a station in Madrid and another in Barcelona). In the context of energy saving and efficency, but also quality sound signal, this is just terrible news. Australia could justify it due to sheer size, but no European country can honestly say the same (except Russia if we include it as part of Europe).

That´s why many insiders consider that perhaps DAB+ will never really take form over here, as internet broadcast could be far more efficient due to the deployment of 5G technology.

 

[Axo1989]

My email to him was published as a "letter to the editor" or whatever he called it. That was not the nature of what I wrote him. I thought I was contacting him to offer myself as a guest on his show. The main reason and trigger for that was him constantly calling Cameron an expert in audio (measurement and their audible ramifications). He clearly is not so I was telling him that if he wanted experts, I was available to play that role, and my qualifications therein. I was not commenting on the specifics of his podcast so calling it a letter response is not proper. ...

He could have used a different heading for greater specificity, but as he's the editor of his site and you sent him a(n electronic) letter, it isn't a great surprise to see it there. In any case I was responding to @JSmith who argued a "shocking" breach of ethics, which is nonsense. If confidentiality was agreed to, that would be different.

 

[Axo1989]

Keep in mind that Berlin in the last century has been a city full of spies (in truth, since Bismark), so you can add that to the list of con men.

I appreciate the rhetorical flourish, but as logic goes it's fallacious. Darko isn't defined by the city he lives in. Nor are Berliners in general con men by virtue of history or geography.

I don't think that session would have happened, even if Amir had written a silk-gloved message. ...

We can make our assumptions, but we'll never know.

 

[JSmith]

@JSmith who argued a "shocking" breach of ethics

Please, don't misquote me there;

this is very poor form by Darko. To post a private message or email exchange is a shocker.

I did not refer to ethics or confidentiality anyway, as in legal terms... it's my personal opinion though that it was poor form and against general etiquette. If you sent me a PM for example I would never publicly post it... oh and "shocker" here in Australia is different to shocking.

Do you think it's ethical for Darko to block referrer traffic links from this site to his? This is how it probably went... Amir sent the email, Darko shared it with Cameron, Darko decided to publish it then block all linked traffic from this site. That's basically a knock and run job, childish... there's no class in that. It's all about protecting his business, not helping the end consumer.


JSmith

 

[Vacceo]

I appreciate the rhetorical flourish, but as logic goes it's fallacious. Darko isn't defined by the city he lives in. Nor are Berliners in general con men by virtue of history or geography.



We can make our assumptions, but we'll never know.

We cannot assume that Darko is a crook for living in Berlin, fair assertion. I guess we cannot assume he´s a crook for making infomercials for USB or speaker cables.

 

[Atanasi]

Do you think it's ethical for Darko to block referrer traffic links from this site to his? This is how it probably went... Amir sent the email, Darko shared it with Cameron, Darko decided to publish it then block all linked traffic from this site. That's basically a knock and run job, childish... there's no class in that. It's all about protecting his business, not helping the end consumer.

Blocking definitely drew attention to the controversy. It causes a Streisand effect.

 

[P_M]

.... the transmission path of the serial interface (S/PDIF, USB) is analog .... Is it so difficult to understand?

Yes, I can see how it can be difficult to understand for someone who is new and trying to understand the whole digital vs analog science and tech behind it. Why make confusing statements like these (" its digital but analog" ) ? It gives the impression that you are trying to say that the digital signal somehow turns into an analog signal (like analog audio on tape or vinyl) when it enters the transmission path, which is an absolutely false and misguiding statement (not to me but probably to many others). It is a digital signal from start to finish. If the transmission medium causes it to change shape it doesn't make it analog!! Is it so difficult to understand ?

 

[DonR]

Yes, I can see how it can be difficult to understand for someone who is new and trying to understand the whole digital vs analog science and tech behind it. Why make confusing statements like these (" its digital but analog" ) ? It gives the impression that you are trying to say that the digital signal somehow turns into an analog signal (like analog audio on tape or vinyl) when it enters the transmission path, which is an absolutely false and misguiding statement (not to me but probably to many others). It is a digital signal from start to finish. If the transmission medium causes it to change shape it doesn't make it analog!! Is it so difficult to understand ?

It is an analog signal in the RF domain. Digital is just an abstraction as everything is ultimately analog in the physical universe (don't mention quantum physics).

 

[pma]

Why make confusing statements like these (" its digital but analog" ) ? It gives the impression that you are trying to say that the digital signal somehow turns into an analog signal when it enters the transmission path

If you want to put words in my mouth, then quote exactly and do not blame me for your word creations. It is not my fault that some do not understand. The whole topic is stupid, as many other topics here.

Definitions specific to sub-fields are common:

• In electronics and telecommunications, signal refers to any time-varying voltage, current, or electromagnetic wave that carries information.
• In signal processing, signals are analog and digital representations of analog physical quantities.
• In information theory, a signal is a codified message, that is, the sequence of states in a communication channel that encodes a message.
• In a communication system, a transmitter encodes a message to create a signal, which is carried to a receiver by the communication channel. For example, the words "Mary had a little lamb" might be the message spoken into a telephone. The telephone transmitter converts the sounds into an electrical signal. The signal is transmitted to the receiving telephone by wires; at the receiver it is reconverted into sounds.

Source:

Signal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[P_M]

It is an analog signal in the RF domain. Digital is just an abstraction as everything is ultimately analog in the physical universe (don't mention quantum physics).

In terms of AUDIO (what else are we here for???) this is an extremely incorrect statement.

You want to talk about RF ? If a 300Mhz analog sine wave was sampled into digital form would you call it digital or analog while the digital form is being transmitted from one point to another ? Does it go from digital to analog to digital ?? The transmission path is not analog or digital its just a simple freakin electrical Conductor!! not an analog conductor or a digital conductor!

 

[P_M]

If you want to put words in my mouth, then quote exactly and do not blame me for your word creations.

I was hoping for a more to the point scientific , technical argument for the subject (AUDIO signals) on hand but I can see why and how you have stopped in your tracks and hiding behind silly excuses (quoting exact words). Because You know exactly what you are saying and doing....regardless of "quoting your exact words"....

 

[Vacceo]

Yes, I can see how it can be difficult to understand for someone who is new and trying to understand the whole digital vs analog science and tech behind it. Why make confusing statements like these (" its digital but analog" ) ? It gives the impression that you are trying to say that the digital signal somehow turns into an analog signal (like analog audio on tape or vinyl) when it enters the transmission path, which is an absolutely false and misguiding statement (not to me but probably to many others). It is a digital signal from start to finish. If the transmission medium causes it to change shape it doesn't make it analog!! Is it so difficult to understand ?

Let me pause you there just for a second so we can dispel doubts. The point here is that the sending side, sends digital; the receiving side, receives digital. Right? Is the way it goes from one to the other relevant for the purpose of audio signal?

 

[P_M]

Let me pause you there just for a second so we can dispel doubts. The point here is that the sending side, sends digital; the receiving side, receives digital. Right? Is the way it goes from one to the other relevant for the purpose of audio signal?

I know what you are trying to do but its not going to work. The "way" does not change it into completely another domain of signal - which is what you and others in that camp are trying to impose. It does not change it into analog audio which is the impression you and the others in your camp are giving. So Either rephrase or reword or describe your point scientifically and technically accurately, or please refrain from spreading misinformation.

 

[MRC01]

... The point here is that the sending side, sends digital; the receiving side, receives digital. Right? Is the way it goes from one to the other relevant for the purpose of audio signal?

It depends on whether you are talking about the signal's physical manifestation, or its meaning/interpretation.
The physical manifestation of the signal is analog, and must be, because discrete/digital physical phenomena don't exist at the macro-atomic scale in our universe.
The meaning/interpretation of the signal is discrete or digital.

Put differently: digital audio is a message or information that is a set of discrete states. To transmit it through the physical universe, we must translate it to some physical manifestation. We're not operating at the quantum/subatomic level, so all physical manifestations are analog/continuous. Yet this translation is reversible, so the receiver extracts the discrete states from the analog physical carrier signal and re-encodes the digital audio.

 

[PeteL]

The "way" does not change it into completely another domain of signal - which is what you and others in that camp are trying to impose. It does not change it into analog audio which is the impression and you and the others in your camp are giving.

Since you generalise your statement to "the other camp" and "others". I will tell you that it's all a mind construction of yours that anybody is trying to impose that it changes it into analog audio. No one has suggested anything near that, have been "giving this impression", at all.

 

[Vacceo]

I know what you are trying to do but its not going to work. The "way" does not change it into completely another domain of signal - which is what you and others in that camp are trying to impose. It does not change it into analog audio which is the impression and you and the others in your camp are giving. So Either rephrase or reword or describe your point scientifically and technically accurately, or please refrain from spreading misinformation.

Actually no, you don´t know. I never stated that it does or doesn´t because I don´t know.

The question had no second thoughts or guesses. I am reading everyone´s posts twice to make sure I follow and understand. When I don´t, I ask: simple as that. You have provided an answer: the transmision method does not change the signal. That is a perfectly fine answer and that´s what I asked for.

It depends on whether you are talking about the signal's physical manifestation, or its meaning/interpretation.
The physical manifestation of the signal is analog, and must be, because discrete/digital physical phenomena don't exist at the macro-atomic scale in our universe.
The meaning/interpretation of the signal is discrete or digital.

Put differently: digital audio is a message or information that is a set of discrete states. To transmit it through the physical universe, we must translate it to some physical manifestation. We're not operating at the quantum/subatomic level, so all physical manifestations are analog/continuous. Yet this translation is reversible, so the receiver extracts the discrete states from the analog physical carrier signal and re-encodes the digital audio.

Being that the case, is the signal susceptible to alterations? Or is that exactly the point of digital, to reduce or eliminate the alterations?

 

[DonR]

In terms of AUDIO (what else are we here for???) this is an extremely incorrect statement.

You want to talk about RF ? If a 300Mhz analog sine wave was sampled into digital form would you call it digital or analog while the digital form is being transmitted from one point to another ? Does it go from digital to analog to digital ?? The transmission path is not analog or digital its just a simple freakin electrical Conductor!! not an analog conductor or a digital conductor!

Once in the digital world, the signal is digital regardless of band. All physical transport is analog as the physical world is analog and it has to deal with analog realities.

 

[DonR]

Being that the case, is the signal susceptible to alterations? Or is that exactly the point of digital, to reduce or eliminate the alterations?

Yes. The encoding of the analog signal into digital form allows for the storage, manipulation and transport of the signal to be done with vastly reduced susceptibility to degradation.

 

[P_M]

It depends on whether you are talking about the signal's physical manifestation, or its meaning/interpretation.
The physical manifestation of the signal is analog, and must be, because discrete/digital physical phenomena don't exist at the macro-atomic scale in our universe.
The meaning/interpretation of the signal is discrete or digital.

Put differently: digital audio is a message or information that is a set of discrete states. To transmit it through the physical universe, we must translate it to some physical manifestation. We're not operating at the quantum/subatomic level, so all physical manifestations are analog/continuous. Yet this translation is reversible, so the receiver extracts the discrete states from the analog physical carrier signal and re-encodes the digital audio.

Translate??? Reversible??? Extract the discrete state ??? from analog ??? Re-Encode????
you are actually willfully spending your time and purposefully making an effort to create unnecessary confusion and misinformation in this space by adding twisted descriptions to what would be normally referred to as an "electrical conductor". Perhaps maybe a bandwidth limited conductor that does not have enough bandwidth to maintain the square shape accurately but .... WTF - if I was the moderator I'd ban you right now for trolling and wasting other people's time.....

 

[P_M]

....All physical transport is analog ...

wrong way of saying it. Its not even a thing. A transport is not analog or digital or ANYTHING AT ALL. All 'physical transport' that you refer to is basically a simple electrical conductor that does not change the type or domain of signal - and your chosen phrase "physical transport is analog" is indicating exactly the opposite. Say it properly, or dont.