| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 2622.1 | | KOBAL::DICKSON | I watched it all on my radio | Fri Apr 26 1991 18:23 | 17 |
| The orginal signal was not "MIDI direct to PCM". The MIDI controlled
something that output (gasp) analog voltages that were converted to
digital by the PCM recorder.
That small amount of analog, which was never recorded, does not appear
to violate what DDD means, so my guess is that the EQing would not
either. Of course, the EQ equipment could be incredibly noisy, so
the affect would be just as bad. But my understanding that the three
letters in DDD refer to how the various stages are *recorded*, not
how they were created or processed.
Probably the audiophiles will want to create a new notation, so they
can identify a pure-digital process, conveniently forgetting that a
digital process can introduce noise just like an analog one.
"Sure, this CD is all digital. Nothing analog after it hit the
microphone. Sample rate? Oh, about 20K per second, 8 bits. Why?"
|
| 2622.2 | | SWAM2::MOELLER_KA | Up your old quota | Fri Apr 26 1991 20:53 | 7 |
| <<< Note 2622.1 by KOBAL::DICKSON "I watched it all on my radio" >>>
>The orginal signal was not "MIDI direct to PCM".
YOU knew what I meant - it didn't hit analog tape.
karl
|
| 2622.3 | FWIW, though nobody can hear the difference | RICKS::SHERMAN | ECADSR::SHERMAN 225-5487, 223-3326 | Sat Apr 27 1991 02:52 | 13 |
| When the PCM goes to DAT it is apparently being converted to analog. So,
the fact that you do a little analog EQ makes little difference, IMHO.
The issue has to do with whether or not the signal gets converted to
analog along the way. If it does, then a "DDD" label would be
misleading. This means that, technically, if conversion of a 48 kHz
sampled signal is converted to 41 kHz via analog conversion then you have
"cheated", even though it is all digital equipment. The noise added
would come from the conversion. My understanding is that in order not
to introduce noise and in order to avoid cheating, you need to sample
at CD sample rates and keep it in the digital domain from the sound
generation to the CD.
Steve
|
| 2622.4 | I Think You're DDD | DRUMS::FEHSKENS | len, EMA, LKG2-2/W10, DTN 226-7556 | Mon Apr 29 1991 12:16 | 13 |
| My understanding is that same as .1's - the three letter code references
the recording format (respectively the master medium, the mixdown
medium, and the commercially offered medium). Since there aren't a
whole lot of studios around yet capable of doing signal processing
*entirely* in the digital domain, it's a good bet that the mixdown of a
lot of DDD recordings involves spending some time in the analog domain.
The "all digital" recording chain, with A/D and D/A conversion only at
the transducer extremes of the chain (i.e., the microphone and
speaker), isn't here yet.
len.
|
| 2622.5 | | DCSVAX::COTE | The keys to her Ferrari... | Mon Apr 29 1991 12:35 | 11 |
| Don't the 3 Ds stand for ...
DDD
|||
|||____Master
||___Mixed
|__Recorded
...?
Edd
|
| 2622.6 | Yes, but... | DRUMS::FEHSKENS | len, EMA, LKG2-2/W10, DTN 226-7556 | Tue Apr 30 1991 15:03 | 4 |
| re .5 - see .1 and .4; but I think you've got the order backward.
len.
|
| 2622.7 | | SALSA::MOELLER | | Tue Apr 30 1991 16:34 | 7 |
| Thanks for the input - "DDD" it is !
karl
p.s. Had a nice visit from Chad Leigh on Sunday. He was down to Phonyx
for a family wedding, and drove to Tucson for a studio visit and some
good Mexi food.
|
| 2622.8 | I've got some AAA LPs... | WEFXEM::COTE | The keys to her Ferrari... | Tue Apr 30 1991 17:58 | 6 |
| .4 makes mention of the "commercial offered medium" as being one (3rd)
of the "D"s. My understanding of the label doesn't square with that.
(I could be wrong!) Mattery fact, I suspect it would be entirely
possible to offer a DDD vinyl LP.
Edd
|
| 2622.9 | Digital Vinyl, Indeed... | DRUMS::FEHSKENS | len, EMA, LKG2-2/W10, DTN 226-7556 | Tue Apr 30 1991 21:21 | 4 |
| Yes, I understand now what you meant. So sorry, beg forgiveness.
len.
|