Is digital really inferior to analog?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 16184 times.

CanadianMaestro

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 1760
  • Skepticism is the engine of progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #120 on: 24 May 2017, 11:49 am »

 Taking my daughter to her first opera will be the next Carmen in Paris. Prepping for that I showed her Callas' Habanera.
Another one down for La Divina in this household.

Saw Carmen at the Wiener Staatsoper in 2013. Elina Garanca and Alagna. Superb.

Garanca is the best mezzo today. Her disc, Meditation, is my go-to to chill late night.

Marius

Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #121 on: 24 May 2017, 11:54 am »
Pavaroti favorite soprano wasnt Callas but Joan Sutherland.



A well, don't get me started. Amazing singers all the way, both Sutherland and Pavarotti had that natural capacity of singing effortlessly and reaching deep within. Hard to find in todays style of operatic singing, especially the male ones.


Enjoy these glorious voices. Add a stupendous orchestra, and you have my all time favorite Turandot: https://www.amazon.com/Puccini-Turandot-Sutherland-Pavarotti-Ghiaurov/dp/B0000041Q3


Non Piangere Liu, and don't stop weeping......


Ciao,
Marius

macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3826
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #122 on: 24 May 2017, 12:18 pm »
We may be approaching a new record for the distance strayed from original topic. We've touched on halls but not yet microphones, costumes or traffic en route to venue. Any plans to return to topic?

S Clark

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 7366
  • a riot is the language of the unheard- Dr. King
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #123 on: 24 May 2017, 01:20 pm »
We may be approaching a new record for the distance strayed from original topic. We've touched on halls but not yet microphones, costumes or traffic en route to venue. Any plans to return to topic?
Why ??

FullRangeMan

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 20010
  • To whom more was given more will be required.
    • Never go to a psychiatrist, adopt a straycat or dog. On the street they live only two years average.
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #124 on: 24 May 2017, 01:32 pm »

A well, don't get me started. Amazing singers all the way, both Sutherland and Pavarotti had that natural capacity of singing effortlessly and reaching deep within. Hard to find in todays style of operatic singing, especially the male ones.


Enjoy these glorious voices. Add a stupendous orchestra, and you have my all time favorite Turandot: https://www.amazon.com/Puccini-Turandot-Sutherland-Pavarotti-Ghiaurov/dp/B0000041Q3


Non Piangere Liu, and don't stop weeping......


Ciao,
Marius
Too bad all Callas recordings are bad, this dificult her CDs to sell.

Wind Chaser

Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #125 on: 24 May 2017, 01:57 pm »
We may be approaching a new record for the distance strayed from original topic. We've touched on halls but not yet microphones, costumes or traffic en route to venue. Any plans to return to topic?

But we still haven't talked about the results of my dogs DNA test...

dB Cooper

Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #126 on: 24 May 2017, 02:04 pm »
We may be approaching a new record for the distance strayed from original topic. We've touched on halls but not yet microphones, costumes or traffic en route to venue. Any plans to return to topic?
I'll return to original question:

No.

Some of the 'straying' tells a good story about how many factors along the way (besides the storage format) influence our experience of what we hear, though.

macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3826
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #127 on: 24 May 2017, 02:06 pm »
But we still haven't talked about the results of my dogs DNA test...
Quite right! I took my Akita over the vet on Wednesday of last week to be euthanized. Turned out he was actually not ready. They gave us pills for him and a bill of just over $200. Clearly my wife should not have been with me. The old boy is 108 in people years according to the chart on the vet's wall. Life expectancy of 8-10 years and he'll be 14 in October if he gets that far.
Windy - Did you find out who is the father?

Wind Chaser

Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #128 on: 24 May 2017, 02:26 pm »
Quite right! I took my Akita over the vet on Wednesday of last week to be euthanized. Turned out he was actually not ready.

Wow, that must have been a relief. Putting a pet down is not an easy task and yet it is the right thing to do when there's no possible hope for recovery.

Windy - Did you find out who is the father?


 :lol:  No, but what I did learn is that he is not a Pit Bull Rottweiler cross as previously thought. In fact there isn't any Pit Butt or Rottweiler in him. As it turns out the DNA test revealed he is a Lab crossed with a Mini Pincher with a little Border Collie and American Eskimo Dog.  :o

CanadianMaestro

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 1760
  • Skepticism is the engine of progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #129 on: 24 May 2017, 02:28 pm »
Quite right! I took my Akita over the vet on Wednesday of last week to be euthanized. The old boy is 108 in people years according to the chart on the vet's wall.

Despite his age, was he able to tell the diff between a digital recording and a vinyl LP?

(There! Back on topic!)

Marius

Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #130 on: 24 May 2017, 02:46 pm »
Too bad all Callas recordings are bad, this dificult her CDs to sell.


Some are worse than others. Mostly the new digital masters.... Back to topic herewith.


No Digital, let alone MQA master will make the 1936  or 1938 Tristan sound any better.
Wouldn't want to be without them though.


Same goes for my hissing and popping analog 78's. All a matter of priorities.


comparing the same master on analog and digital i wouldn't be able to answer the original poster. I can say i like m both in different circumstances.


Cheers,
Marius


macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3826
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #131 on: 24 May 2017, 02:48 pm »
Despite his age, was he able to tell the diff between a digital recording and a vinyl LP?

(There! Back on topic!)
Throughout his long and colorful life, he has steadfastly refused to acknowledge any distinction between the two, although when he wants to be readmitted to the household after a potty visit in his dog yard, he can sound downright operatic. Claims that the middle C stands for CANINE. No discussions of this kind in recent years since he went deaf a few years back. Still talks about the day Thunderbrick visited. They hit it off immediately. No one ever rolls on the floor with him like the 'brick did.

macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3826
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #132 on: 24 May 2017, 02:53 pm »
Wow, that must have been a relief. Putting a pet down is not an easy task and yet it is the right thing to do when there's no possible hope for recovery.
 

 :lol:  No, but what I did learn is that he is not a Pit Bull Rottweiler cross as previously thought. In fact there isn't any Pit Butt or Rottweiler in him. As it turns out the DNA test revealed he is a Lab crossed with a Mini Pincher with a little Border Collie and American Eskimo Dog.  :o
Our vet stressed "quality of life" - ours and his. Said that is how to determine when to pull the plug. He thought Toke still had a bit left and sold us dog drugs to keep him in better trim. He could die any day now but he'll feel better until the day comes.

As for your dog, Windy: it sounds like he has a long and questionable lineage of loose bitches preceding him. I was tempted to lay it all on his mother until I realized that DNA probably reflects much more than one generation of history. Is that correct?

Wind Chaser

Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #133 on: 24 May 2017, 04:43 pm »
DNA probably reflects much more than one generation of history. Is that correct?

Yes, that is correct. The lab that conducted the test uses a scale of 5 levels, not generations, but levels based on the percentage of DNA.

Level 1 = 75% or greater
Level 2 = 37% - 74%
Level 3 = 20% - 36%
Level 4 = 10% - 20%
Level 5 = 9% or less

Axel is a Level 3 Lab and Level 3 Mini Pincher; Level 4 Border Collie and Level 5 American Eskimo.

When I adopted him the SPCA had me thinking he was Rotty Pit Bull.








Elizabeth

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2736
  • So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #134 on: 24 May 2017, 04:45 pm »
I wonder if dogs vs cats is similar to LP vs digital?
I have pet birds... So I do not know what that 'format' would be? reel to reel tape??? Maybe FM radio?
I would have a dog if I owned a house. Apt dwelling is no place for a dog.

macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3826
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #135 on: 24 May 2017, 05:00 pm »
I wonder if dogs vs cats is similar to LP vs digital?
I have pet birds... So I do not know what that 'format' would be? reel to reel tape??? Maybe FM radio?
I would have a dog if I owned a house. Apt dwelling is no place for a dog.
I'm unable to answer with confidence. You pose a difficult question. I do know that all cats are arrogant although I cannot remember a cat stooping low enough to offer an opinion on anything. Normally they turn their noses up at everything but certain food items of their choosing - not yours. I'm sure your birds would discourage the acquisition of a cat.

macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3826
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #136 on: 24 May 2017, 05:01 pm »
Yes, that is correct. The lab that conducted the test uses a scale of 5 levels, not generations, but levels based on the percentage of DNA.

Level 1 = 75% or greater
Level 2 = 37% - 74%
Level 3 = 20% - 36%
Level 4 = 10% - 20%
Level 5 = 9% or less

Axel is a Level 3 Lab and Level 3 Mini Pincher; Level 4 Border Collie and Level 5 American Eskimo.

When I adopted him the SPCA had me thinking he was Rotty Pit Bull.





macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3826
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #137 on: 24 May 2017, 05:08 pm »
Looks like a brute. Easy to see what led to mistaken ID. I've always marveled at how people look at a dog and press a guess as to which TWO breeds combined to produce that animal. Meanwhile, as you learned recently, there can be a large number of contributors since the parents might be mixed breed also and the same with their forebears. Fact is, the pedigreed dogs have been intentionally developed, whereas guys like Axel are the result of mad unplanned passion.

Bendingwave

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 358
Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #138 on: 24 May 2017, 10:08 pm »
Despite his age, was he able to tell the diff between a digital recording and a vinyl LP?

(There! Back on topic!)

But at that age he cant barely hear past 5khz.  :lol:

Larkston Zinaspic

Re: Is digital really inferior to analog?
« Reply #139 on: 24 May 2017, 11:10 pm »
"I wonder if dogs vs cats is similar to LP vs digital?"

I gave up on the whole 'cats vs. dogs' debate a long time ago. My current animal companion is a three toed sloth, named Eddie. You hardly know he's there, but every two months he climbs down from the small trees in my living room to take a shit on the floor. At first this may seem cumbersome, but Eddie is really slow. I never have to chase him around the house, and at least I have enough time to be prepared.

In about twenty years or so, when Eddie finally falls out of the tree in a soporific heap, then I'll know it's time to take him to the vet. How's that for low maintenance?