697

submitted 3 months ago by nifty@lemmy.world to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

127 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org 19 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

You can sit here and have an argument about Nyquist-Shannon, but it isn't relevant for lots of music made in the past 40 years since it was made or recorded digitally.

If your work was made with a DAW there's no point to analog.

I've got a record from a smaller artist somewhere that I swear has fucking mp3 compression in it, because they don't know how to export their shit like an adult.

[-] zephr_c@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

The only meaningful difference between them is that digital is cheaper to copy. Your ears are analog though, so everything you've ever heard in your entire life is 100% pure analog, and I explicitly said in the post you seem to think that you're disagreeing with that they're both orders of magnitude better than they need to be.