by Drem » Wed Sep 15, 2004 5:19 pm
The simple intent of a recording is to try to store the artistic expression in such a way that the listener will have optimum clarity of the sound of that performance and therefore can perceive the artistry of it. This means drawing the most nearly perfect straight line (preserving the linearity) between the input from the artist and the information output available to the consumer. Intrinsically, a recording represent the end of a chain of storage media — tape, lacquer master, metal parts and, finally, vinyl or back to tape.
But watch that first step! All subsequent forms can do nothing to improve our precious linearity, and every wiggle in that straight line introduced in that first step is inevitably present in the final product.
Recording devices have historically described their credentials in technical terms of "frequency response," "signal-to-noise ratio," "distortion characteristics," "cross talk" (in multi-track recording), "wow and flutter," "print through"— to the technically oriented, a series of numbers that reflected, comparatively, a device's ability to trace some kind of line between its input and output. And between the days of acoustic recording and today's tape machines, there is in evidence a vast improvement in the character of that line. But suddenly, thanks not only to the computer age of hardware but also to the discipline of digital thinking, a new system of recording reared its elegant head, nodding in the direction of audio recording and making it possible for the consumer to have an infinitely clearer concept of the original sonic experience. It is called "digital" because it records numbers to represent the sound. The value of the system is that these numbers are not subject to the frailties of conventional tape recording, and therefore it can produce a virtual straight line between studio and disc.
Conventional recording devices from the time of Edison's cylinder have always attempted to describe and store sound in a form analogous to the manner in which we perceive it, that is, a mechanical, electrical or magnetic fluctuation that follows the air pressure variations by which we experience a sound—a logical idea, provided all associated devices can do that with adequate fidelity. As matters stand today, microphones respond to these sound-pressure variations and convert them into an accurate electrical analog. In that form nothing much can go wrong in today's mixing consoles, but storing the signal of mechanical or magnetic form introduces elements of confusion primarily because of the storage medium itself. And confusion is a lack of clarity in conveying the aesthetic message. There goes the desirable linearity!