Digital BW, The Print

Hi Bruce,

> I can't help wondering if there's a corollary here to digital audio,
> if I can drift off-topic.

I've delved into that quite a bit...having designed a lot of digital audio
gear...

> Problem was (and is) that the 16/44 CD never sounded as "good" as
> analog tape (or the venerable LP) in a high resolution audio system.
> The decimation, data jitter, and aliasing problems become easily
> audible.

Initially and up until about 7 years ago, I completely agree...the
oversampling filters were really pretty bad, and they did sound bad.  I
believe you mean interpolation, since decimation is decreasing data, and
interpolation is used to increase the data to smooth out the data to be more
analog (less distance between voltage steps), so a lower order filter can be
used which decreases aliasing.

With proper design, all the problems you mention can all be severely reduced
so they are not audible at all.  I have a very high end CD player (ML39),
that used a very very well designed analog front end, as well as every
conceivable method to keep analog noise down...and it easily sounds better
than any album, and certainly far better than any tape.  You're welcome to
come listen any time ;-)  This is due to painstaking engineering, and
considerable expense.

You make a good point, but I do believe that static visualization
(photography) is very different than dynamic audiblization (audio....ha, I
made a new word, I think ;-).

Regards,

Austin