Analog elitism debunked: digital is actually analogue anyway

▶ MY PLUGINS: https://apmastering.com/plugins ▶ MY COURSES: https://apmastering.com/courses SHOPS I USE AND RECOMMEND: ▶ Sound Imports: http://soundimports.eu ▶ SchneidersLaden: https://schneidersladen.de GEAR I USE AND RECOMMEND: ▶ Squarp Hapax: https://squarp.net/hapax ▶ Hypex amplifiers: https://hypex.nl ▶ Reaper: http://reaper.fm STUDIOS I RECOMMEND: ▶ Studio Wong: http://studiowong.de ========== VIDEO DESCRIPTION ========== This video was inspired after countless comments from analogue purist hifi audiophiles who claimed that my vinyl-digital comparison video is invalid because to hear the "true sound of vinyl" the signal path must be all analogue. What does analogue even mean? When you actually try to define it, you come to something like "continuous / non-discrete electronic representation of the original sound wave". However, nothing in our universe is truly continuous. There's large amounts of space between molecules and atoms and sub atomic particles... see Max Planck for details. And you might think, "oh well that's just being pedantic!" but no, because some modern digital formats have higher sample rates literally that the amount of magnetic particles per second on analogue tape. Like actually. So digital, given this definition is more analogue than analogue tape. If you define digital as "computer type stuff" then fine but, given a black box storage mechanism, there's no detectable means of claiming digital is "discrete" once it is low pass filtered. And there's no real detection if high quality digital at all apart from its absence of distortion compared to traditional analogue formats. Or put otherwise, with sufficiently high quality digital technology, listening to a record is indistinguishable from listening to a rip of the same record and you would fail a properly conducted ABX test.