|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
|
|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
In Reply to: I think it means reproduction of the input signal posted by tomservo on February 28, 2024 at 10:37:11:
I agree and thanks for making this point. IMHO I would raise the definition of accuracy another level. Let's take a person in a studio playing the trumpet. The closest you can come to having another person be convinced that they are hearing that real person playing a real trumpet in a studio would be the most accurate EXPERIENCE. This doesn't have to do with microphones or 20hz to 20Khz etc, focusing on having the sound come as close to the mixing consoles specs, or what's on the 'master tape' etc. leaves a lot of accuracy on the table.If certain audiophile techniques, editorial, intentional distortion/EQ etc results in more people being more touch and experiencing a closer version of the original event, then I would say it is more accurate in the truer sense.
I'm sure this will put a lot of noses out of joint though. Who is to say what techniques will get you there? But also, what measurements matter to accuracy, or How they are measured, that is always questionable.
It is this very uncertainty that makes the audio world both frustrating and fun. And its living/developing in these areas that comes up with new innovations and progress.
Going back to James P Johnston's history, at the time he developed MP3 codecs, they were the most accurate audio available that was compatible with the then current technologies storage capabilities, network bandwidth, and portability.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: I think it means reproduction of the input signal - Tuckers 03/10/2419:30:05 03/10/24 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
