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

Are you implying that the cost of the system determines the quality of the output? If that’s the case, I’ve never seen a $30k Birkin looks and feel better than $1k LV. They’re just more about something else rather than the functionalities.

I do not think that more money necessarily equals better sound. I think that when an audio professional who listens to a variety of audio gear all the time and communicates frequently with the people who design and build the gear spends $123,000 on a turntable and probably has it set up by the guy who designed it, there is a good chance it will sound better than one you pay $5,000 for and set up yourself.

I know that Valin doesn’t pay $123,000 nor would you pay list price for a $5,000 turntable. I’m just using the list prices for comparison purposes.

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

"They" (analog diehards) said the same about analog cameras (movie or still) vs digital cameras (movie or still)

Cheers George 

It is said that to equal an LP, a digital system would have to sample at minimum of 7 million samples a second, and with ~zero jitter~ in that spec to be met. The interchannel timing accuracy of an LP is way out of the league of the Best digital out there.

This was known by the mid 90’s.

In complex harmonic signals, which is what music is.... the human hearing..meeting that spec with digital... might require a minimal sample rate of a few million samples a second.

Just to hear a single short bell tone in proper space, acoustically, in a triangle or equilateral set up of listener and speakers, at 8 feet apart, etc..a digital system would have to sample at a minimum of 225k samples er second, at a 20 bit depth, with ZERO jitter. that’s a minimum, for a single short pure tone. If the point source seems to move to the ears, by one inch of placement in space and we can hear that easily (we can!)..well..that ’s the minimum spec (225/20) required to get that out properly.

Now add in an entire orchestra and accompanying space.

We were discussing this on line and arguing about it, again, by the mid 90’s. On the bulletin board systems in the "rec.highend" discussions.

None of these critical specs have miraculously changed.

Neither has the argument from those espousing digital as superior. Such arguments don’t take into account the ear and how it works, nor do they take into account the fundamental physical specifications of an LP, in a complete way.

It’s the standard case of cherry picking one’s ignorance into a false premise.

23-24 years later these tedious arguments still come around.

Past job our office was near this company, https://www.vanausdall.com/history/. One they invited us over to view their Thomas Edison Wax Cylinder collection.

That's the way to go.