jdandy
New member
- Thread Author
- #1
I hear it all the time, "It sounds more analog." I've said it myself on more than one occasion, but what are we really saying? What exactly does "It sounds more analog" mean? The fact is everything we hear is analog no matter what the origin of the source. That is how human hearing works. Our ears sense frequency differences and fluctuations in air pressure. That is the essence of what analog sound is. Everything we hear is analog, so when we say something sounds more analog what are we really saying? Are we conveying our idea of a recorded and reproduced sound to an actual true sound? Does the idea of perfect audio reproduction have different analog levels, sort of like "true", "truer", and "truest"? When we say a recording sounds analog, at what level does that become the most accurate descriptor for the sound we are experiencing?
I understand that an analog recording captures the original and true sound via microphones, converts the analog frequencies and sound pressure differences to movement of a microphone's diaphragm which in turn generates a corresponding electrical signal that is in turn converted to a magnetic flux field that is captured on magnetic recording tape. Reversing this process takes the magnetic flux density variations on the tape and converts them back to an electrical signal representative of the original analog sound. It sends those signals through multiple amplifiers that eventually increases the voltage levels high enough to energize a speaker's voice coil, thus setting the speaker cone in motion to create fluctuations in air pressure and frequency that represents a relative facsimile of the true original sound. The same process happens for digital recording up to the point where the analog signal is converted to digital before being recorded. The reverse happens for reproduction of the original and true sound by converting the digital signal back to analog electrical wave forms for amplification high enough to energize speaker cones that in turn create analog wave forms of varying frequency and pressure fluctuations to produce sound.
In my opinion, it is a given that there is no such thing as perfect sound reproduction. At best reproduced sound is only a duplicate with imperfections that are nonexistent in the original and true sound. There are many compromises made in order to capture sound to tape, vinyl, or digital recordings. Compromises may not be applicable from one format to the next but all formats suffer to one degree or another from necessary decisions and inherent shortcomings of the mechanical and electrical restrictions of each process.
In the end all methods of capturing the original and true sound result in an analog electrical signal being recreated and analog wave forms emanating from our speakers as sound. So, what exactly are we saying when we describe one sound as being "more analog" than another sound?
I understand that an analog recording captures the original and true sound via microphones, converts the analog frequencies and sound pressure differences to movement of a microphone's diaphragm which in turn generates a corresponding electrical signal that is in turn converted to a magnetic flux field that is captured on magnetic recording tape. Reversing this process takes the magnetic flux density variations on the tape and converts them back to an electrical signal representative of the original analog sound. It sends those signals through multiple amplifiers that eventually increases the voltage levels high enough to energize a speaker's voice coil, thus setting the speaker cone in motion to create fluctuations in air pressure and frequency that represents a relative facsimile of the true original sound. The same process happens for digital recording up to the point where the analog signal is converted to digital before being recorded. The reverse happens for reproduction of the original and true sound by converting the digital signal back to analog electrical wave forms for amplification high enough to energize speaker cones that in turn create analog wave forms of varying frequency and pressure fluctuations to produce sound.
In my opinion, it is a given that there is no such thing as perfect sound reproduction. At best reproduced sound is only a duplicate with imperfections that are nonexistent in the original and true sound. There are many compromises made in order to capture sound to tape, vinyl, or digital recordings. Compromises may not be applicable from one format to the next but all formats suffer to one degree or another from necessary decisions and inherent shortcomings of the mechanical and electrical restrictions of each process.
In the end all methods of capturing the original and true sound result in an analog electrical signal being recreated and analog wave forms emanating from our speakers as sound. So, what exactly are we saying when we describe one sound as being "more analog" than another sound?
