My CD source sounds stunning and there certainly isnt any digital edge. It is also has the most detail retrieval of any source I have heard, analogue or digital. Mind you to get this kind of performance from CD does not come cheaply 

But you see all of the event as defined by the sampling frequency. If you choose the sampling frequency correctly then you see all the event that you are capable of seeing. Similarly for CD. A bandwidth of 20kHz is available and you get everything within that bandwidth at a resolution and channel separation way better than vinyl.The whole sampling thing is like standing on a platform and blinking really fast when a speeding train passes by ââ'¬â€œ you can see a series of short images of the train, but inevitably you do not see the whole event.
Originally posted by merlin
OK, I'm going to shock you Neil. Vinyl does some things better than even the Eclipse. I'm not saying it is a better format full stop, and contrary to Michael's comments, CD will remain my main source of music. But when it comes to realistic high frequencies, I have yet to hear a CD player that does it.
The upper harmonics of many instruments are going to be artificially truncated by any form of Nyquist filter. Whether you think this has an audible affect at such high frequencies is the can of worms that ain't worth opening.
A bandwidth of 20kHz is available and you get everything within that bandwidth at a resolution and channel separation way better than vinyl.
I didn't claim that. You reckon that a vinyl cut is every bit as good as an analogue master?you reckon a 16 bit signal is every bit as good as the analogue master then?
Show me an expert opinion.Isn't that at odds with the opinions of most experts in this field who consider 20bit depth to be the minimum requirement for accurate reproduction of complex waveforms?
Now you are an expert on what the 'problem' is?You seem to be sidetracked by the frequency issue, 44.1 is fine for the audible frequency range in theory. It's what the filter does above it that's the problem.
The Nyquist criterion explicitly excludes this situation. The maths works, many implementations suck.To go back to my daft train analogy, my feeling is that with the low bandwidth digital sampling of just twice the required frequency there is a chance of blinking at the same rate that the coaches of the train pass, therefore seeing the wrong information of a stationary train.
But the information isn't there to reproduce, at least not in general. A tape machine cannot go that high.A good record deck can easily produce output at 60-70Khz, so this may have something to do with the analogue mediums superiority at reproducing high frequencies.
But the information isn't there to reproduce, at least not in general. A tape machine cannot go that high.