A very good ENGINEERING explanation of why analog can not be as good as digital..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzRvSWPZQYk

There will still be some flat earthers who refuse to believe it....
Those should watch the video a second or third time :-)
128x128cakyol

Showing 5 responses by kijanki

Why not bring other issues related to digital, like aliasing or jitter? Also Nyquist/Shannon theorem applies to continuous waves only. Yes, you can accurately recover the sinewave with only two samples per period, but to do so you need a lot of periods - not possible (accurately) with constantly changing signal.

This video reminded me short film about the study made of an ethnic group in South America that, on average, had extremely long lifespan. British scientists found that they drink contaminated water, eat unhealthy food and engage in activities, like smoking, that should shorten their life. Last words of narrator were: "It is good that they don’t know it"



No matter what the resolution and data rate a digital representation of a sound, it will always be an approximation of the original event.
+1,  Tom1000
It is not matter of disproving, but rather knowing limitations (understanding it).  This theorem only states that you can recover continuous signal by sampling at least two times per period.  It does not say you can do that when waveform constantly changes.

I'm not sure what this means, but nothing is perfect.
That's all I'm saying.  

..the transient need only to fall within the bandwidth of the system. It’s why digital audio works.

For any signal to be perfectly band limited it would have to extend infinitely in time.  There are many other shortcomings like less than perfect brickwall filters with uneven group delays, jitter in A/D or D/A conversion etc.