can I expand the original question, please? thanx what format is original audio for Movies stored in? In the booklet for T2:Extended Edition (2003) it says that when sound is converted to DVD format the audio is reduced in size by 98%. somehow I don't think original was wav
2: Many modern recordings are completely digital, from the microphone to the CD. Therefore analog to digital is irrelevant.
Alright, from my thread on whether or not WAV files are lossless, for all intents and purposes, with regards to ripping direct from a CD, it seems like, yes, WAV is lossless... are CDs lossless? So... is a CD lossy?
Quote2: Many modern recordings are completely digital, from the microphone to the CD. Therefore analog to digital is irrelevant.This part is not necessarily accurate. Nearly all sounds we hear are not electric (even 'electric guitars'). In order to capture that sound digitally, it has to be sampled (which is the fundamental concept of digitization). True lossless would have a sampling rate 2 times higher than the highest harmonics created by a sound.Even then, don't forget that air is one of the ULTIMATE lossy compressors. So if we're being excessively pedantic here, there is loss between the sound source and the transducer of the microphone.The point is that if you want to be absolutely technical about things, there is loss well before it makes it to the final media. Do you ever hear this? Again, technically yes, depending on your reference. One statement I've always wanted to make with ABXing is that no setup (or VERY few) can pass an ABX from a live performance. (Not that it's really been attempted).Also, this was more to try and draw some parameters from the original question, how far back in the recording/processing mix before you get to lossless (essentially).
You quoted me, but I don't really think you read what you quoted: ... completely digital, from the microphone to the CD ...I wasn't talking about the air. I was talking about the equipment. (Though if you'd bothered to read the next line, I did mentioned the air later.) If you want to be overly anal, then yes, I suppose it undergoes an analog->digital conversion going into the microphone. But professional microphones will sample at rates far higher than the human ear needs. So that's completely moot.And if you're going to be so pedantic, you should note that electric is not the same as digital. Electric guitars do produce an electric signal, simply not a digital signal.I'd bet that well over 99% of the data loss associated with recording comes from the mastering process (read: intentional loss), rather than from equipment limitations.P.S. Data loss that the human ear cannot detect is completely irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. I don't give a damn if they lose frequencies only dogs can hear, nor do I care if they can't capture (on CD) noise above the threshhold of pain. Such effort is a waste.
Otherwise, there would be absolutely no reason for 24-bit 96kHz recordings.
The moment audio is *sampled*, it becomes lossy. Even if a sound it sampled at 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kHz, it is still not infinite, the way our ears hear live audio.
Quote The moment audio is *sampled*, it becomes lossy.Â Even if a sound it sampled at 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kHz, it is still not infinite, the way our ears hear live audio.The neural signal from your ear to your brain is digital. It's quantised (1 or 0), but not sampled (the pulse can happen at any point in time). The transduction process from pressure wave in air to neural signal is very lossy. The neural signal itself is very very noisy, but our brain processes it well.
The moment audio is *sampled*, it becomes lossy.Â Even if a sound it sampled at 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kHz, it is still not infinite, the way our ears hear live audio.
First, I should tell you that my argument was not directed at you, but at the original poster. Your second point seemed like the best place for me to squeeze in.
As for your quote, I read it, do you understand it? Microphones have an analog component in them, a transducer*. Hence the reason I make mention that sound is not electric. If it were, then we wouldn't have to worry about the loss due to the transducer, now would we? In either case, there is an analog to digital conversion that must take place, hence the loss there. Also, if microphones sample far higher than the human ear needs, then there must be resampling that occurs since 44.1kHz is barely above what it needs to be.* I'm not aware of any purely digital transducers in microphones. If there are, then I'm potentially wrong about it being analog. However, turning audio energy into electrical energy is ALWAYS lossy.
As for your 3rd point, which I felt had no bearing to my post, you mention that CD contains more data than air can carry. I felt that this was an error at best and a blatently misleading statement at wost. Air can carry 23kHz tones just fine, whereas CDs can't. Granted it's above the threashold of human hearing, but you didn't mention that until your response.
Finally, although I agree with you on your statement that most audio loss will occur in the mastering process, I'm not certain that it's not in part due to equipment limitations. Otherwise, there would be absolutely no reason for 24-bit 96kHz recordings.
Good microphones are just analog, there's no conversion to digital inside. The conversion is performed at a ADC outside the microphone.
Is CD audio lossless? It can't be...ever...not technically. Without some miraculous new recording technique, in my opinion, *no* digital recording format could ever be lossless. Even if you set up a million of the world's best quality microphones plugged into the world's best quality digital recording equipment around one guy playing an acoustic guitar. One ever-so-insignificant bit of sound is lost between sample #954 and sample #955.
So in theory, unless I am wrong (which I will admit that I definately could be), to have a lossless audio CD, the result would have to be an infinite bit rate and an infinite sample rate.So... is a CD lossy?