Who into Analog sound technology on Sup Forums?
Analog Sound Technology
I thought one of the more clever audio techniques was pre-emphasis in audio tape where you boost the part of the eq where the tape is noisiest when you record and then you notch that part of the eq on playback.
yea that's what dolby NR is basically based on
I'm into vintage audio stuff in general. I have the opportunity to buy a Roberts 771x, which is essentially an akai m9 reel to reel for $25, but I'm not sure if it works, and I do not have any tapes for it.
I heard that this unit is not particularly good, but was unable to find a reason why. I also heard that reel to reel stuff can be sort of a money pit.
Should I go for it, or should I trust my judgement?
yoo hoo
Okay I may seem retarded but I grew up in the CD generation so CDs and digital shit makes sense to me, but how the fuck do tapes actually produce sound?
And is it actually legit that the groves in fucking plastic (LPs) can produce any sound in the world? How the fuck are people not more blown away from that
>but how the fuck do tapes actually produce sound?
>And is it actually legit that the groves in fucking plastic (LPs) can produce any sound in the world? How the fuck are people not more blown away from that
there are good wikipedia articles on all those technologies young user
They say you can listen to a conversation from thousands of years ago from the pottery people made back then because of the grooves. Like an old recorder.
I want to press that play button so bad.
WHY CAN'T WE HAVE BUTTONS ANYMORE.
those vu-meters
There's no reason for analog since you can emulate it in digital
Semi related, but why do idiots rush out to buy new music on vinyl when that shit was recorded digitally in the first place? I see a lot of retrowave type of stuff release limited vinyl and the fans go crazy over it. Makes zero sense. A flac release makes more sense.
>how the fuck do tapes actually produce sound?
magnetic fluctuations encode the waveform
>And is it actually legit that the groves in fucking plastic (LPs) can produce any sound in the world?
no, vinyl records have many limitations, which makes mastering them a challenging task (making it both sound ok AND physically able to be played back without the needle jumping out of the groove)
I love the way vintage PAs sound. I have a shitton of pink floyd bootlegs and their use of quad surround is insane, along with their overall audio quality.
Pic related, their 1980 wall tour PA
As well as their foh mixers with 105 mic inputs
What model Walkman is that? Does it suffer from the same "clicking" as the consumer Walkman DDs?
A nice physical copy to go with the FLAC recording (which many of them come with download codes for).
Also they are always good for a full-album listen if you have a good setup.
Some are collectors who just like to have a physical release too, the rest are just plain retarded.
It also gives them a chance to complain about the pressing on Discogs.
Same reason people print 3d models of useless artsy things when they are actually modeled on a computer.
if you prefer the vinyl sound why not
most people prefer the analouge version over the digital
bait-des
I-I think that analogy only works half way through user
they might like the artwork, or the feeling of taking out a huge disc and placing a needle on it, or the unique crappiness that comes from the limitations of mastering a vinyl
>always good for a full-album listen
not really, since the quality of vinyl drops steadily from the outside to the inside of the disc
>the unique crappiness that comes from the limitations of mastering a vinyl
amateur
or newbie, I don't judge
well the type of art is different, but it's still art, you could look at 3d art on a pc screen or see it IRL, without there being any difference. There is no reason to have "real life" art unless the artpiece itself involves touching the object, same goes for music.
With "real life" art I meant digitally created art.
It's not an analog recording though, you're transferring a digital recording back down to analog which is retarded. If you're gonna release a vinyl, record that shit analog to begin with. If you want to sell a physical copy of a digital recording, issue a CD, or better yet a high bit rate dvd recording. Even super cd if they still make those.
hmmh not that I fully agree with you but I got what you were trying to say
but for the record a "real life" vu-meter just makes me harder than a plugin or whatever ever could
yes what you said is right pretty much
heh yet what I said still applys
>you're transferring a digital recording back down to analog which is retarded.
why?
don't you know you can digitally represent a bandlimited analog signal completely perfectly? it was proven so nearly 70 years ago
then why even have analog if the digital is perfect?
well, real sounds are analog, so recording will always begin with analog
and human hearing is also analog, so reproduction will always end with analog
but everything in between can and should be digital, we know the limitations of human hearing, and at this point it's trivial in terms of processing and bandwidth to exceed those limitations digitally, so yea, there's no reason to use analog audio signal processing or storage anymore, plenty of room for error, and impossible to be better than digital, as digital is literally perfect
Listening to an original pressing of Unknown Pleasures or The Nightfly is also pointless I guess, since they also leveraged digital technology in their recording processes and are subsequently "tainted."
Even Jean Michel Jarre's Oxygene has a digital synthesizer tone on it, in '76!
the only way to be safe is to never listen to anything released after the 60s I guess.
and analouge processing, storage is another matter, is still being used today for the exact same reasons that user stated
funny isn't it
The oldest known audio recording is a French folk song in the 1860s.
There was a machine that would spray soundwaves onto paper or something as a visual gimmick. It was only realized that it could be decoded a few years ago, and now we can enjoy a song that was never actually meant to be heard.
The pottery thing is bullshit.
?
also, why do i get so many variations of "CALLE" in captchas? it's weird
may it be something made with analouge equipment or just an analouge end product
analouge sounds different than digital, most people prefer it over digital, it's more natural you could say
quite literally
currently there's no end of the analouge equipment in sight
hah the pottery thing right I totally forgot
I think even the mythbusters did a show including that once now that I think about it......
>analouge sounds different than digital
analog can only be the same or worse, as far as consumer analog mediums go (such as vinyl and cassette tape) they're considerably worse
there's nothing wrong with liking the hiss, the cracks and pops, and the lower dynamic range and frequency response. but don't say it's "more accurate" or "more natural", as it's simply not true
real life doesn't sound like a vinyl record
stop implying I'm retarded
do you work in the field by the way ?
I have an analog synth if that counts.
>stop implying I'm retarded
well you did call analog 'more natural', which makes no sense
>do you work in the field by the way ?
i don't
lmao I read that in a Donald Duck strip.
pardon the timeout
then don't let's elaborate any further
doesn't make much sense if you don't know the work itself
sounds so derogative... I'm not trying to sound like that
Sup Forums here.
just be sure to fuck off to Sup Forums
Reel to Reels are technology, you Sup Forumsack
Thats what dolbyNR is
>you can digitally represent a bandlimited analog signal completely perfectly
The mathematics is there, but notions such as causality and physics get in the way.
A bandlimited signal is indeed represented by samples taken at twice the rate of the interval in question. However, an exact representation and reconstruction of the original signal uses the Sine Cardinal to interpolate values between the samples.
The sine cardinal is not causal, it requires knowledge of future inputs. It requires a filter to totally reject frequencies outside the interval(an ideal brickwall). This has a consequence of a filter that has infinite oscillations before and after.
Thus, real world filters can only aim to approximate the sine cardinal. We do know how they differ from the original, contrary to insistence from certain misguided consumers.
>it was proven so nearly 70 years ago
This is a communication problem of research journals. There are other mathematicians who offered a proof before Shannon did. Shannon even references one of these (Interpolatory Function Theory, J.M. Whittaker, 1935), but none seem to have made it into the English language engineering journals beforehand, as also pointed out by Shannon.
AFAIK, the first proof of sampling and interpolation is offered by E.T. Whittaker (not to be confused with his son J.M.) in 1915. Shannon offers a simpler and much shorter proof and delves into additional concerns of bit depth and noise using this theory.
I have an old akai tape deck.
GX-265D.
But it only records on one side.
Google can't handle french words
Yes but it can be fixed. There's a Jewtube video on the process.
Real buttons and meters can not be replaced by simulations on a screen.
>But it only records on one side.
you're meant to flip the tape yourself
y'know, take it and and turn it around
I record all of my music live to reel to reel tapes. It's nice. My work ethic doesn't sit easily with post production though
you have to flip the tape over user.
Just got one of these bad bays, now I need another Dolby C deck just for laffs.
Actually, the GX-265D records in both directions.
Auto-reverse too.
I meant only one stereo channel.
Motherfucker. How much did you pay for it?
>one stereo channel
that would imply tapes have multiple stereo channels (quadraphonic?)
presumably you meant "one channel", as in only left or right works
4 track tapes have 2 stereo channels in 2 directions for the purposes of the GX-265 in question. Only one stereo channel is recording.