Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site hound.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!hound!rfg From: rfg@hound.UUCP (R.GRANTGES) Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Re: zen and the art...stardate 850530.10 - analog uber alles? Message-ID: <1206@hound.UUCP> Date: Thu, 6-Jun-85 17:30:50 EDT Article-I.D.: hound.1206 Posted: Thu Jun 6 17:30:50 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 7-Jun-85 03:45:32 EDT References: <1200@hound.UUCP> <362@moncol.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ Lines: 25 [] The removal of garbage masking noise by the CD process is certainly no excuse for lousy sounding CDs. It an explanation of why sound peculiar. Why others sound really awful is perhaps better explained by the documented fact (i.e., I read it in a mag) that some ignoramuses didn't care which tape they gave to be digitized. The vast majority of FM broadcasts are recorded. There is no guarantee that those few that are done "live" will be done correctly. Still, the process capable of low distortion/noise. It is not the fault of the broadcaster if you tolerate bad multipath. It's up to you to buy a good antenna system and rtesistant tuners. Failing that, move to a better location. Not, of course, as low as CD, but considerably better than 1% THD. There are many fine speaker systems that will measure substantially less than 1 % THD over most of the frequency range (say down to 40-50 hz) at reasonable power levels (say below 90 db SPL). Above that level one is progressively less able to hear the distortion anyhow. Your ears start generating their own at levels above ...100 db(?). Sure there are lots of other "distortion sources." Right now I'd like to ignore them. -- "It's the thought, if any, that counts!" Dick Grantges hound!rfg