I found the drama of it a bit much. From the imaginary waiting for the door to close behind the deserters that where virtually leaving the room to the 40 years of theory and stuff that backs up his claims. If he's so comfortable and entrenched in the subjective camp then why does he care one bit about tests and blind listening?
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Is Digital Audio Transmission Analog? [video]
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Ken Tajalli
Major Contributor
Ken Tajalli
Major Contributor
A 44.1kHz square wave is not music, nor audible.
Where is this coming from? I never suggested anything like that?
Ken Tajalli
Major Contributor
. . .Variable Pulse width squarewave, as many audio synthesizer do, you amplify this signal and feed it trough speakers,
The point was: it is more analog because it's in the audio band? You seem to think so.
Ken Tajalli
Major Contributor
On my fifth beer this lovely warm summer evening!
Cheers.
Read up in digital vs analog.
I am through for tonight.
DonR
Major Contributor
Well somebody certainly needs to read up.On my fifth beer this lovely warm summer evening!
Cheers.
Read up in digital vs analog.
I am through for tonight.
DonR
Major Contributor
Is Digital Audio Transmission Analog? [video]
A new argument has developed that transmission of digital audio is really analog. And for this reason, everything digital can be subject to audible difference from digital audio cables to digital output of streamers. This was emphasizes in a video by Darko Audio saying this explains his...
www.audiosciencereview.com
I think the concept of a "signal" depends on communication and includes the intend way of interpreting the message, otherwise there are just electrical waves or other physical quantities, which are not "signals" as such.
The defining feature of an analog signal is that the voltage of the source, for example, is analogous to some other quantity, like the pressure of a sound wave. Without such an analogy, there is not an analog signal in a proper sense.
Digital signals encode discrete symbols. When analog signals have a limited bandwidth and SNR, they can also be interpreted as discrete symbols by sampling.
The signal on the wire (or on fiber as modulated by the LED or LASER) is analog. It is converted to digital by the SerDes for use by the digital logic circuits.
Definitions I have used "forever":
Definitions I have used "forever":
- Analog = continuous in time and amplitude
- Sampled-analog = discrete time or amplitude, other parameter continuous
- Digital = discrete in time and amplitude
Last edited:
Exactly. All digital electronics are RF and analog on the electronic circuit/device level. This is a clear as cake, me thinks.
Clever mathematicians invented digital systems (centuries ago), not "digital" electronic engineers.
It just happened that analog electronic circuits are extremely effcient in respresenting, and working with, the two binary states (or more, sometimes ;-)
MRC01
Major Contributor
Close but I would quibble with the definition of digital.
Digital is about representing information as discrete states, nothing in between the states. Can be binary, trinary, or whatever. Not necessarily numbers. In fact, numbers can be a continuum (rational numbers, real numbers). Digital states may be represented as discrete numbers, but they don't have to be numbers, and numbers are incidental. The essential point is that the states are discrete.
Analog implies a smooth continuum of signal. Not discrete, but any of infinitely many values within a range is valid. Note that this does not imply that analog has infinite resolution. Some states are so close together they cannot be differentiated.
You said analog means a representation that is "analogous" to the information being represented. This is true. Yet all our senses are perceptually "analog" -- regardless of whether the universe is actually analog or digital, smooth continuous is how we perceive it. So as a consequence analog ends up implying smooth continuous.
I agree. You can have media that stores a smooth continuum, like gradations of magnetic field strength. If when reading it, you apply thresholds to force it into discrete values, then you've "digitized" it.... Such a signal over wire is not an analog of the sound. It does contain analogs of the numbers, though. While I'm not mad at anyone who wants to call a continuous signal "analog", it's pointless and causes confusion. Since digital is always encoded in some way, I don't think it's helpful to call it analog when it's a voltage over a wire and digital when it's not. It's still encoded digital. And since digital is always encoded, drop it and call it a digital signal.
Recently listened to Darko‘s podcast episode with golden sound. If you want to understand darko‘s opinion on measurements, I recommend listening to it.
I generally don’t recommend trying to argue with tryhard subjectivists because it’s mostly just a waste of time.
But Darko is a bit more open towards different opinions as the podcast has shown IMHO
I generally don’t recommend trying to argue with tryhard subjectivists because it’s mostly just a waste of time.
But Darko is a bit more open towards different opinions as the podcast has shown IMHO
i'm just watching darko's video, what's the point of the video, should i impress a lady friend with this or ...*, even my cat would jump out from open window hearing this,
water is water and sky is blue man, enjoy it..
water is water and sky is blue man, enjoy it..
OK but that is being very, I'd like to say anal (og) on the wording. I guess that yes we could technically use the term "signal" by what is actual information, the content delivered, then yes digital would be appropriate but it's a bit far fetch. Me by signal, I am talking of what I can see on my oscilloscope. The electrical signal. And Amir (and Darko) actually talk about "transmission". The physical voltage variations.
Rational numbers are not as continuous as real numbers
The idea of continuum is in fact only attained in mathematics. In physics (in nature) we say that some quantities can take any value and we represent them with real numbers, so they mathematical representation is continuous and we know that up to our limit of measurement they can take indeed any value, but that doesn't mean they are truly continuous of course. The conjecture of continuity arises its own problems and questions however, such as if something like 2/3 seconds is a time period that can really exist, or stated in another way, what does 2/3 seconds mean. In the end it seems than nature is discrete at the microscopic limit, but in the world we can measure with our instrumentation, the continuous assumption holds. On the other hand, there are very simple quantum systems or magnitudes that are intrinsically discrete, as the number of possible states is finite and countable, sometimes consisting only two of them, so we could call them binary systems or magnitudes, intrinsically binary.
Digital, as others have said, is a representation, namely a function from any set to {0,1} that we define, like calling something A and something else B.
By the way, great video! Perhaps the best among the educational ones.
MRC01
Major Contributor
I'm aware of that, but for purposes of this discussion it's a distinction without a difference. If you prefer, use the word "dense" instead of "continuous", meaning: "You pick any 2 numbers, and I can find another between them". Even though the rational numbers have holes/gaps from a mathematical perspective, they are still dense which is sufficient for "analog" as we're speaking about it here.Rational numbers are not as continuous as real numbers
The idea of continuum is in fact only attained in mathematics. In physics (in nature) we say that some quantities can take any value and we represent them with real numbers, so they mathematical representation is continuous and we know that up to our limit of measurement they can take indeed any value, but that doesn't mean they are truly continuous of course ...
Given the great amount of trigonometrical/periodic functions that arise in signal processing, I would be so confident using rational numbers in this context.
I just commented on that because nobody uses rational numbers to represent a physical magnitude. Some of those gaps are quite meaningful and arise quite often, like sqrt(2) or pi.
Similar threads
