Re: Digital to Analog downloading Question ?

On Apr 15, 3:55 pm, Peter Wieck <p...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Apr 14, 9:49 pm, eseedho...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:

> > In fact we can do it intentionally and we know how to do it.  AR did
> > it reliably back in the 1960's for gosh sakes!
>
> Truly, I was waiting for this!

> OK, AR did do this.

So you admit it can be done, that it can be done repeatedly, and that
we pretty much know how to do it.

Yes, as you go on to say,  it's impractical for the home, difficult to
do (or at last was in the 1960's), expensive and so on.

None of which changes the fact that it was done for some live music.

The original claim allowed for no such exception, so I believe that
the exception disproves it.

> Now, I would posit that with my back turned and no context, based on
> many sorts of signal, my Maggies might fool me into believing
> something "live" was back there under some conditions. The ringing
> phone, a cat meow or dog bark  (we have both), even a door opening or
> closing - sounds without context. That is a good start anyway.

And my much cheaper speakes do it fairly frequently on similar
sounds.  Actually it's almost impossible to distinguish between live
and recorded electronic phone rings.  None of that means we've solved
the problem of reproducing live sound accurately in domestic
circumstances.  But it does disprove the rather absurd claims of all
live sound being easily recognized as not recorded and vice versa.

Audio is difficult, but it is not mystical.