well SDW, I was addressing things in the sense of the general complaint about analog vs digital - if you're fine with it good on you!
Lets address another thing - the presence of energy that you perceive rather than hear. First off I dont fully know the answer to this question, however I think it is possible to look at other systems that I do know about to get a good guesstimate about how likely it is that ultrasonic waveforms have a perceptible effect on normal sounds.
A quick look on Wiki confirms that ultrasonic noises, those above 20khz can have an 'impression' on the mind - if the sound is 'wired' directly to the skull and bypasses the bones in the ear.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound
The question is - is it this effect that is responsible for the pleasing characterists of vinyl vs digital? I think the answer is no.
Lets go back a step and consider the sampling of every individual note of a piano at 24/196 for a massive multisampled instrument to get a clear picture of the variables at play.
The problem with sampling every note of a piano is one of resonances between the strings. In effect all other things being equal, striking one note causes other strings to vibrate in sympathy, but only certain other ones. The way this is worked out is that if a string has an overtone in common of one of the harmonics, a resonant wave will be set up.
So if you pluck a string say 200hz, then strings tuned to 400hz, 600hz, 800hz etc will resonate. However, you have to look at the waveform of the fundamental to see how much energy is transfered to the other strings. Assuming a sawtooth wave - which has all odd and even harmonics falling away exponentially in energy from the fundamental, you can visualize that it would take one hell of a 200hz wave to get any meaningful resonances past the 10th harmonic.
That being said, after you have sampled every note of the piano, (which incidently does not look anything like a sawtooth wave, it has far fewer harmonics, you might think you have the perfect sounding piano - all resonances included) . Nope!
The voodoo thing ... is when you strike 2 notes together on a real piano - it sets up a different set of resonant interplay between the strings than you would verifyably get if you hit both notes seperately. And offcourse you have not sampled these variations...You cant accurately sample a piano - unless you take a sample of every single combination of the 88 keys - and that is not possible.
However - we have looked at this in reverse of what we are trying to find out. We have been hitting a low note and finding out if higher tuned strings resonate. They do. Now what happens if you hit a high note? do lower tuned strings resonate?
They do....But to what extent?
But its more complex. In order for a lower note to resonate in sympathy with a higher note, it has to have a harmonic sequence that at some point coincides with the fundamental or one of the harmonics of the high note.
So for instance, it I strike a virtual 1000hz sawtooth, my first harmonic is going to be 2000hz - but at half the energy. Theoretically, a 500hz virtual string will have a 3rd harmonic at 2000hz so they can resonate, however the 3rd harmonic of a sawtooth is 1/3 the energy of the fundamental, so even in the best theoretical example you can imagine, the transfer of resonant energy is pretty miniscule. Especially when you consider that sound is measured on a logarathmic scale BUT heard only as one continuous wave by the ear - which is deconstructed in the brain - which is really
But lets take this too our digital ultrasonic example. Can say a 40khz wave cause resonances in audible sounds that to any practical extent can be perceived by a human - either consciously or subconsciously.
Starting with the basics. Any wave that is created at 40khz is going to be by default a very high order harmonic of something. That means it contains very little energy. Sawtooths are extreme examples - most instruments produce nowhere near as much harmonics as a sawtooth - or square wave.
Any ultrasonic harmonic produced by a natural instrument is going to be extremely low energy. Its potential for causing a resonance in the audible spectrum is therefore extremely low. Then factor in that an audible sound has to have an harmonic in common with the ultrasonic sound to resonate, and again by default, this harmonic is going to be of a very high order with a miniscule amount of energy attached to it. To all extents and purposes the resulting cross product resonance is basically nothing.
Now if you take a high frequency pure-tone audible wave in complete isolation and resonate it with a single tone ultrasound and measure the distortion very accurately - in labratory settings - you will find a very small detectable resonance - and this is what I believe the hi-fi freaks have latched on to. They're shouting "look its there - ITS THERE!!!' -Im missing something yadda yadda yadda!!!"
But its not there, it was created by a special electronic circuit designed to output things you cannot hear - and more importantly - really would not want to hear.
What they're missing apart from a few marbles, is that this is not the realworld. There is no music id want to listen too that contained nothing but 20khz puretones modulated with ultrasonic frequencies - and that the whole test is designed to show what happens in the very worst case scenario - again something that never happens in the realworld.
Then factor in that even in the very best recording studios, by the time the ultrasonic wave has passed through all the equipment that is needed to record and duplicate the sound in the first place - that is IF the microphone even picked it up in the first place.....It simply does not exist in the vinyl recording anyway!
It is not the Low Pass Filters, Bit rate and sampling frequency (ie lack of ultrasound) that are the issues in recordings made to CD's - just as it is not the presence of ultrasonic sound that makes vinyl sound the way it does.
The pleasurable warmth of vinyl recording is because of magnetic saturation, non-linear distortion, magnetic hysterisis, eddy currents, frequency responce of capacitors and inductors in the circuit....and a million other things - ALL OF WHICH SERVE TO DEVIATE THE RECORDED WAVEFORM FROM THE ORIGINAL- yes it sounds nice, but thats the black art form of the audio designer.
From a technical, accuracy, perspective, when done right, CD's reproduce the original waveform much more accurately, subject to thier characteristic distortions.
The funniest thing is, what it comes out of, is and will always be an analog device. The Loudspeaker. When you physically reproduce the sound on your loudspeaker, the cone has to move between the positions of any two samples anyway, thus smoothing the sampled waveform of its sampling frequency, bit depth and step distortion- thus interpolating all the missing *theoretical* perceived energy you cant hear anyway - anyway!!!