Posted: 4 Nov 2000 9:54 am
There's a reason I think that the "warmth" of an LP is really distortion (not in the pejorative sense of the word). Due to the sampling frequency, it's the highs that really have the potential to "suffer" (due to their own distortion of being combined with a digital smoothing filter at the output stage) on CD's. Now, most humans can't hear above about 20 khz anyway. And many people (esp. musicians or frequent concert-goers) have significant reduction in their hearing in the high-frequency range.<SMALL>and do not consider "warmth" distortion but rather the "clinical" sound of CD as a reflection of using bits and bitstreams, rather than audio frequencies as a way to process sound.</SMALL>
So, when people like that say that LP's are "warmer", it can't be something in the high-end (since they can't hear it without their own ears applying a signifcant filter anyway). And what's left in the mids and lows just isn't affected nearly as much in the output of digital music data. (Yes, it IS being affected, because it's being smoothed).
So, I guess, it's proper to say that LP's have their own distortion, and CD's have their's, too. If you like the sound, you prefer to call it "warmth" rather than "distortion", though
I still think that running a CD back through some sort of tube amp would bring back most of the "warmth". I wonder how some double-blind tests would fair with such a contest? LP vs. CD through tubes. The problem is, the scratches and pops of the LP would be a dead give-away, so no truly blind test could be done.
------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons