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