Members aeon Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 BBDs are subject to aliasing, Nyquist frequency limits, clock noise feedthrough, and output filtering just like digital memory devices. Quite correct, becuase BBDs are sampled, discrete-time devices. Another example of a sampled, discrete-time system is 35mm motion picture film. Each frame is the sample - but the recording system is analog, as is a BBD. Just because a system uses sample-and-hold in the temporal dimension does not mean the system is digital. cheers, Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vedder323 Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 True bypass... really man, just to echo what others have already said, dont let it stop you from buying something that sounds good to YOUR ears. "If it sounds good, it IS good" -Duke Ellington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I know it's not cool to care about anything, but getting called out by one of the top admins of HC for no reason at all isn't really cool either. I found the "calling out" to be a bit on the light side - way lighter than your reaction to it. Really, we all know you're a smart dude. The fact that apathy is obviously very cool has nothing to do with my addressing this subject; I just wanted to tell you that we're not judging you. Unless you take things too seriously, in which case WE ARE JUDGING THE {censored} OUT OF YOU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mlabbee Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 Quite correct, becuase BBDs are sampled, discrete-time devices. Another example of a sampled, discrete-time system is 35mm motion picture film. Each frame is the sample - but the recording system is analog, as is a BBD. That's a great analogy - makes it much easier to understand how BBDs work. The reason I think of BBDs as analog/digital hybrids is because of the time slicing, but you are correct, they are true analog devices. One of the big complaints about digital audio (real or imagined) is the fact that the signal is "chopped up" - I guess a lot of people think of that as being "digital." Perhaps we should reclassify delays as analog, sampled and digital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members chuckmoose Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 IMO don't buy an analog delay. ... Newer delay pedals such as the DD20, SMMH, Nova, and the Timefactor all model analog delays and they sound just as good. They don't "sound as good" they sound different. I have a pile of them laying around and trust me they all sound different. Analog delays sound different from each other, as do digital delays. There is no best, no "as good", only what you personally like and dislike. I like warm, dark analog delays that sit way back, almost buried, in the mix like my vintage MM and Carbon Copy. I have a Memory Lane 2 on the way so that I can have some of those features most often found in digital pedals and hopefully still get the analog sound I like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Agreed Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 I found the "calling out" to be a bit on the light side - way lighter than your reaction to it. Really, we all know you're a smart dude. The fact that apathy is obviously very cool has nothing to do with my addressing this subject; I just wanted to tell you that we're not judging you. Unless you take things too seriously, in which case WE ARE JUDGING THE {censored} OUT OF YOU. This isn't at all about me being smart or not, or worrying about what you or the forums at large thinks of me. Who cares about that {censored}, it's the internet, if you can't please everyone in real life you'll drive yourself mad trying to do it online. The reason I didn't take this as lightly is because I hardly ever see Phil joke around anymore. Since the spam thread problems he seems like he's been pretty serious all the time, mostly popping in to let people know they're in some {censored} (see his most recent post in Supervelcroboy's Dan-o rehousing thread for an example). I know if I were him I would get tired quick of some of the inexplicable drama and unnecessary problems in the forums... But I don't think I've been one, and I didn't say anything wrong, so I don't know why the first time I can ever remember Phil addressing me in any way on the forums would be to come down on me. And it's possible that I'm misinterpreting his intent, which would cause me to overreact, but there's my explanation of why I took it more seriously than you have. If that means YOU'RE JUDGING THE {censored} OUT OF ME then party on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 This isn't at all about me being smart or not, or worrying about what you or the forums at large thinks of me. Who cares about that {censored}, it's the internet, if you can't please everyone in real life you'll drive yourself mad trying to do it online. The reason I didn't take this as lightly is because I hardly ever see Phil joke around anymore. Since the spam thread problems he seems like he's been pretty serious all the time, mostly popping in to let people know they're in some {censored} (see his most recent post in Supervelcroboy's Dan-o rehousing thread for an example). I know if I were him I would get tired quick of some of the inexplicable drama and unnecessary problems in the forums... But I don't think I've been one, and I didn't say anything wrong, so I don't know why the first time I can ever remember Phil addressing me in any way on the forums would be to come down on me. And it's possible that I'm misinterpreting his intent, which would cause me to overreact, but there's my explanation of why I took it more seriously than you have. If that means YOU'RE JUDGING THE {censored} OUT OF ME then party on... Gotcha. He had a thread recently in which he gave a lot of forumites funny names...? I must be seeing a different side of him. And I would never judge you like Stallone would.I appreciate your responses, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Agreed Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 I missed that one, and you're probably right - I am probably overreacting. I apologize if that is the case, to Phil and to you for making an "ass" reply before explaining myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I missed that one, and you're probably right - I am probably overreacting. I apologize if that is the case, to Phil and to you for making an "ass" reply before explaining myself. hahahah It's cool. My post was fairly ass-like anyway. Internets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Let It Burn... Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 This is how I experienced this thread: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AMZ-FX Posted March 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted March 10, 2009 The reason I think of BBDs as analog/digital hybrids is because of the time slicing, but you are correct, they are true analog devices. One of the big complaints about digital audio (real or imagined) is the fact that the signal is "chopped up" - I guess a lot of people think of that as being "digital." Perhaps we should reclassify delays as analog, sampled and digital. If you look at the output of a BBD with an o-scope, you will see that the output is a series of steps, just like those coming out of a D_A converter... like I said before, it's only in the way that the instantaneous voltage level is being stored. It's still a stepped output and you would have difficulty telling a digital signal from a BBD (but it is possible).I certainly don't dispute that BBDs sound different, but in my book, BBDs aren't analog... in the end, let your ears be the guide! regards, Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dolf Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 If you look at the output of a BBD with an o-scope, you will see that the output is a series of steps, just like those coming out of a D_A converter... like I said before, it's only in the way that the instantaneous voltage level is being stored. It's still a stepped output and you would have difficulty telling a digital signal from a BBD (but it is possible). I certainly don't dispute that BBDs sound different, but in my book, BBDs aren't analog... in the end, let your ears be the guide! regards, Jack That doesn't make any sense.I understand what you're saying, but it sounds like you're going "well, you're right about what you said, but I'm going to choose to believe the exact opposite just because I can."It's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AMZ-FX Posted March 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted March 10, 2009 I understand what you're saying, but it sounds like you're going "well, you're right about what you said, but I'm going to choose to believe the exact opposite just because I can."They can sound different, just as an 8-bit digital delay will sound different than a 16-bit. Not all digitals sound alike. Not all BBDs sound alike - Reticons vs. Panasonic anyone? :D All I'm saying is that once you slice up the incoming analog waveform into discrete measured voltage segements, and then reassemble them, its no longer truly analog... but who cares, as I said, let your ears tell you what you like!-Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Malekko Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Nope, analog signal path, through and through. At no stage in their path is the signal converted to digital, much less converted back to analog. Yes, this is correct - a BBD is driven by a clock such that it samples the input signal in discrete time slices. Exactly, and this difference is why the BBD is classified as an analog device. A digital system stores a sequence of zeroes and ones after analog-to-digital conversion, whereas the BBD stores the electrical signal directly, without conversion.Quite correct, because BBDs are sampled, discrete-time devices. Another example of a sampled, discrete-time system is 35mm motion picture film. Each frame is the sample - but the recording system is analog, as is a BBD. Just because a system uses sample-and-hold in the temporal dimension does not mean the system is digital. cheers, Ian Thanks Ian - you saved me some typing. Good analogy (pun intended ) with the 35mm film. It's the storage medium, and the lack of conversion to / from any sort of digital representation that makes a BBD delay "analog". They store the actual electrical signal, not a digitized representation of that signal as binary data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mlabbee Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 Well, if you rely on the Wikipdia definition, I think Jack is right. A BBD definitely uses discrete values to represent the signal (albeit not in numerical form). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital Edited:And Merriam Websters, definition 3: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/digital Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mlabbee Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 Because you were not the only one to imply that BBD's are digital, or quasi-digital - mlabbee made some similar points. Are you calling me an idiot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slight-return Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that I think you're an idiot - that was not my intention - I just have a disagreement with you regarding the technical aspects of part of your post. I think that's the problem with the facepalm smiley Think about what the gesture communicates - what that gesture typically means n conversation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Well, if you rely on the Wikipdia definition, I think Jack is right. A BBD definitely uses discrete values to represent the signal (albeit not in numerical form). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital Well, if we're going to rely on Wiki, you might want to read what they have to say about BBD's: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucket-brigade_device Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I think that's the problem with the facepalm smiley Think about what the gesture communicates - what that gesture typically means n conversation You mean "not this crap again"? That's kind of what I was trying to convey. Didn't we recently have a large thread with this same discussion? I thought we did... and it's kind of a moot technicality thing... if you want to think of a BBD as a sort of digital device, that's fine with me... but I respectfully disagree. And I'm not looking forward to a repeat (pun UNintended this time ) of some of the arguments from the earlier thread, much less am I interested in participating in them.Oops - looks like it's too late for that now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dolf Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 They can sound different, just as an 8-bit digital delay will sound different than a 16-bit. Not all digitals sound alike. Not all BBDs sound alike - Reticons vs. Panasonic anyone? :D All I'm saying is that once you slice up the incoming analog waveform into discrete measured voltage segements, and then reassemble them, its no longer truly analog... but who cares, as I said, let your ears tell you what you like! -Jack Let's say this, then:While a BBD may not necessarily be Analog (by the definition that you have provided) It is also NOT digital because the signal is never converted into a series of 1's and 0's (the very definition of digital)In this way, we agree to disagree while still maintaining that BBD is in no way "digital," as it fails to fall within the limits of the definition of the word.While it may be similar, it is NOT the same and as we all know, close only counts in two things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Agreed Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 Thank you for clearing that up, Phil. I'm glad it wasn't what I had thought it was, though a little sheepish for overreacting like that. I think of emoticons as a way to convey some real feeling in text, so the idea that what I had said was making the admin was a little bit disconcerting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members aeon Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 in the end, let your ears be the guide! When it comes to sound, I do. When it comes to technical considerations, I prefer reason.cheers,Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mlabbee Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 Well, if we're going to rely on Wiki, you might want to read what they have to say about BBD's: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucket-brigade_device That's why I added the Webster's definition - I didn't really appreciate it until this thread, but I think many people conflate "digital" and "binary", because most digital systems these days use binary notation to represent the data. If, however, one defines "digital" as "discrete units", then BBDs and film are, in fact, digital. They simply use analog mechanisms for storing the discrete units of data. I guess this actually validates my original statement that BBDs are analog/digital hybrids . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dolf Posted March 10, 2009 Members Share Posted March 10, 2009 That's why I added the Webster's definition - I didn't really appreciate it until this thread, but I think many people conflate "digital" and "binary", because most digital systems these days use binary notation to represent the data. If, however, one defines "digital" as "discrete units", then BBDs and film are, in fact, digital. They simply use analog mechanisms for storing the discrete units of data. I guess this actually validates my original statement that BBDs are analog/digital hybrids . . . Making the argument that film is digital is not only asinine, it's completely laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.