Xref: utzoo sci.electronics:10673 comp.std.internat:625 rec.video:11169 comp.graphics:10441 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think!redsox!campbell From: campbell@redsox.bsw.com (Larry Campbell) Newsgroups: sci.electronics,comp.std.internat,rec.video,comp.graphics Subject: Why I hate CDs (was Re: I don't need HDTV!) Message-ID: <1554@redsox.bsw.com> Date: 17 Mar 90 23:14:47 GMT References: Reply-To: campbell@redsox.bsw.com (Larry Campbell) Organization: The Boston Software Works, Inc. Lines: 22 In article bas+@andrew.cmu.edu (Bruce Sherwood) writes: -The analogy with audio is that a CD with frequency response out to 10 -MHz would not sound better than one with frequency response out to 20 -KHz, because the human ear can't hear the higher frequencies. Speak for yourself. Perhaps the *average* human ear can't hear higher than 20 KHz, but some can. I don't know what frequency they are, but I can hear those "ultrasonic" sonar burglar alarms -- and they are loud enough to be painful if I'm standing directly under the transducer. But I know most people can't hear them. CDs would have been nice if they had a decent high frequency rolloff; but if I A/B an LP and a CD it is clear that the CD has cut off the higher frequencies. So I get a choice -- ticks, pops, and rumble, or missing high frequencies. Feh. Anyone know if DAT will have a better high end than CDs (presumably this depends almost entirely on its sampling rate)? -- Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc. campbell@redsox.bsw.com 120 Fulton Street wjh12!redsox!campbell Boston, MA 02109