Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sunybcs.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hao!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!sunybcs!charles From: charles@sunybcs.UUCP (Charles E. Pearson) Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: The Jow of CD Message-ID: <43@sunybcs.UUCP> Date: Wed, 20-Jun-84 11:43:53 EDT Article-I.D.: sunybcs.43 Posted: Wed Jun 20 11:43:53 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 22-Jun-84 20:33:22 EDT Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science Lines: 48 Boy! You like to miss-read anything you get your eyes on. After your massive blunder, I was having such fun watching you continue the farce.... Now it is time to clear up some of your self-generated problems. 1) I never specified the frequency that the square waves were measured (?) at for my initial flame. The source was that comic book called 'AUDIO' and their consistant mis-intreperation of their tests. They are the ones who use the square wave test. (Not I.) They are the ones who specify the frequency. (Not I.) They are the ones who think it is correct and valid. (Not I.) I view their test as an example of how CD implimentation has failed us miserably. They view it as an example of how perfect the CD is. The sinus-soidal properties of their square waves is the perfect example of how the CD cannot re-produce a signal properly (at any frequency from 0.01hz to 1000Khz). Sample rate and resolution be dammed. The square wave of a digital system must be flat or it doesn't work (yet). The sample rate is another problem/question entirely. As for resolution, I prefer the idea of 32+ bits/sample to allow for future improvement instead of limiting the tech. to something questionable. 2) I never said that I could hear the difference between a cow and a Boeing 747, much less the difference between a 20Khz square and sine wave. I said that the people foisting an inferrior example of a possibly supperior technology upon us have given us the shaft. It needs a lot more work. At its present level of quality, it should still be in the proverbial drawing board, or possibly as a prototype, not in production. 3) I did say that I couldn't spell or tpye. 4) I do admit that digital tech. promises to be better. How many years will it take to get it any where near its potential depends upon howw any twerps accept their current LOW interpretation. Charles E. Pearson UUCP: {allegra, seismo}!rochester!rocksvax!sunybcs!charles decvax!watmath!sunybcs!charles ARPA & CSNET: charles.buffalo@rand-relay Physical: University Computing Services 4250 Ridge Lea Road room 28 SUNY Center at Buffalo Amherst, NY 14226