Analog video vs digital video pdf Continue Analogue vs. digital - the debate seems to be everywhere. The problem is that a lot of people just don't understand what these terms mean. In one 25-minute video - engaging and entertaining to watch right through - the biggest myths all get busted. In short: 1. 16-bit, 44.1 kHz is really good for many tasks. (You save this data for the computer and processing, not your own ears. 2. Digital sound does not include stairs. 3. Digital signals can be stored and used to play sound identical to what is stored in analogue form. The choice between analog and digital as a category, so makes no sense at all. Now, choosing between individual filters, for example, or taking care of the physical design of electronic instruments, or acknowledging that you can spoil digital or analogue recording - all these things matter. In fact, they have such a value that obscuring them with misinformation is very bad. The video is The Work of Monty Montgomery in xiph.org. (See also: and Watch the video, but here are some discussions: Digital technology is pretty easy to define. The system, using a digital signal, simply presents information as discrete, selected values. The analog signal uses an ever-changing electrical signal. Both are a means of coding - neither is a literal sound. The digital system is so named because these discrete values are akin to counting (hence the numbers, as when counting on your fingers), while the analog system uses an electrical signal that is similar - though not literally - to the original, in that it changes in how (for sound) the pressure will be. The problem is, people imagine digital signals to be something other than what they really are. Ubiquity can breed ignorance. Before digital technology became so widespread, recording and photography were the first revolution. And perhaps part of the problem is that our society has become so comfortable with these processes - those that would have seemed magical to someone just over a century ago - that we have not been able to distinguish between representation and the real. But any photo, any entry is different from its original theme. Analog and digital signals, like words and numbers, are a means of encoding information. Each of them has limits. In sound, these limits are measured in sizes that measure sound, frequency and amplitude. Digital is no less real than analog - and because we listen, after all, sound rather than signal, the two can achieve the same results. This means you don't have to choose. It's not a religious issue. This is a detail of the implementation. This does not mean that between analog and digital in itself does not matter - - Details can be very important. If you understand that fundamentally, digital and analog signals can create and capture the same sounds, then you turn instead all the other potential decisions a designer can make. There are many different varieties of filters, for example, each of which has different characteristics. Choosing an analog or digital circuit becomes dependent on what is the most economical, the most logical, and what desired sound characteristics and the convenience of using the circuit will have. And as people over- emphasize the difference in signals and fundamental sound characteristics, they also ignore everything else. For example, the choice of analog control or digital control is important. (In short: without smoothing, digital controls can cause ladder effects, and analog controls may be more limited in terms of features such as automation.) It also puts in a sharper relief to other reasons why people advocate for analog technology. The heat of the analogue, for example, may not be a fundamental characteristic of analog signal, but is typical of other trends in analog design. This tells us in part that having more literal accuracy is not always better. Analog gear also behaves in a unique way, prone to climate change, age, dirt and other features - something that can be positive in some cases and negative in others, but it is harder to model digitally. Most unfortunate is that the term analog has replaced the term physical, especially outside the sound context. No equipment is truly digital. All this includes a number of analog circuits, for example, and this is also the total sum of many design solutions. The fact that we think of computers as having no physical interfaces is perhaps itself a critique of the physical interaction of computer design - we are thus used to the mouse and keyboard that we can forget that we have tangible experience at all. The advantage of other designs may be to remind people of that experience. When people describe the appeal of vinyl records, hardware synths, covered pens and switches, patch cables and modular, and other analog experiences, what they really say they like is the physical qualities of these things. And there's no reason why digital technology can't be involved. Increasingly, this is the case: music is now very often digitally recorded, mixed, and mastered before being pressed to vinyl, and digital instruments use more knobs and switches and even patch cords rather than focusing on virtual screen experiences and the like. Instead of getting stuck in pointless debates like whether analog or better, in other words, we need to have a very meaningful debate about design, sound, music and art. But it sounds, on the contrary, like a good use of time. Spend 25 minutes You won't regret it, even if this material is reviewed. Thank you Chris Randall for the tip. Tags: analog, create-analog-music, digital, DSP, coding, training, opinion, rants, signal processing, theory, video Content Previous Introduction analog vs. digital editing digital information recording is an evolution from analog, which most depends on computers and their popularity and availability. Initially, the production of the video was a large gambit of machines and electronics specifically created for this industry. As computers became more advanced, cheaper and more accessible computer applications spread to almost all industries. Widespread use of computers to manipulate video has been hampered because video requires relatively massive data storage, processing and transmission requirements. As hardware has become cheaper and more powerful, and storage space in particular has become abundant, the use of a computer to manipulate video has become more cost-effective than not. Currently, video production is at the end of the transition of technology from analog system to digital system. Digital Editing Why Use Digital Technology? (editing) Digital has advantages and disadvantages like any tool, but the general consensus is that digital is better, and for good reason. In post-production analog video, there are basically two editing options. There is an assembly (aka linear) editing in which the final product is assembled from different parts in order from start to finish. If changes need to be made at any time, then everything from that moment to the end of the change must be recreated from the source material. This is, of course, problematic if the production needs are the least bit dynamic. Avid was the first popular computer non-linear editing app originally created to edit movies. It was a small step towards moving to professional video editing apps. Nonlineary editing allows the editor to ripple insert so that everything that happens after the change shifts to accommodate the shift. As computer editing became increasingly popular, the choice was either from hardware-driven tape to tape-based linear systems or the digitization of analog frames into a computer for digital editing. Because computers are digital systems, not analogues, the video is translated into a digital signal. The evolutionary step was short to have a video signal recorded digitally. When using an analog system, there are some serious limitations that can be problematic. First, when you edit a video, the process does not take the physical material of the tape, cut it with a razor, and him with other clips as could be with the film. Rather VTP will read the information from the source tape and send send signal on VTR, which will record the signal on the new tape. This is called Generation and the analogue tends not to make a 100% accurate copy during this process. As the video is pushed through more and more generations, the signal worsens until it is substantially unrecognizable. There are tools that help reduce this - like wave-like monitors, signal amplifiers, etc. - but most analog videos are unusable after 5 to 10 generations (for professional standards). On the other hand, as long as the information is not processed (e.g. color correction, transitions, etc.) DV can withstand dozens of generations, and some manufacturers have reported more than 100 generations without noticeable loss in image quality. On the other hand, there are limitations to the digital system, mainly in terms of sample rates and pseudonyms. However, as video signal delivery is not analog in any way (pixels) digital processing of information on these discrete units seems to make the most sense. Next Manufacturing Process of Digital Electronic Presentation moving visual images This article is about the digital techniques applied to video. The standard digital video storage format can be viewed on DV. For other purposes, see Digital Video (disambiguation). Digital video is an electronic representation of moving visual images (video) in the form of coded digital data. This contrasts with analog video, which is a moving visual image with analog signals. Digital video includes a series of digital images displayed in quick succession. Digital video was first commercially introduced in 1986 in Sony D1 format, which recorded a non-repressive standard digital video definition component.