Home General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

An uniformed hypothesis

I am bit reluctant to post this since it does little more than expose my ignorance; but perhaps that's not an entirely bad thing. Maybe I'll get a point or two for candor....

Can anyone here who actually knows something about the technical differences between digital and analogue reproduction of sound and images respond to this: Is the somewhat unnaturally crisp quality of digital sound and digital photography (not to mention digital television rendered in high definition) attributable to the fact that at least pixels and sound bits have defined edges, the former, in effect, square? Under very high magnfication, digital images appear as sqauares; under the same magnfication, 'analogue' images appear as blur. We know that digital sound is made up of a great many discrete bits, analogue sound of a continuous wave.

I'd be as happy to have this hypothesis refuted as confirmed, since it feels simple-minded and might be be worth dismissing out of hand.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Parts Connexion  


Topic - An uniformed hypothesis - Bob Neill 06:40:53 08/7/06 (67)


You can not post to an archived thread.