What makes analog so analog?

[no_signal]

What part of a digital system do YOU think would be best to replace with an analog piece?

Digitally controlled, analog processing.

[no_signal]

It would seem that in practice you actually do agree with me that there is audible distortion in the 44.1 kHz, 16-bit format.
later,
McLilith

Yes, I was one of those guys who started a first world war of aliasing Here @ k-v-r.

[Robert Randolph]

It's not random because you can predict what the value will be if given the seed and algorithm.

randomness just doesn't exists (do you believe in it?), everything has a cause. Here random rather means unpredictable for humans, and you can easily make an unpredictable random number generator on a PC. It would only be predictable if you had the algo, the random seed, and could, for ex, analyze 44100 random values per second in your analog head.

errr. That's faulty reasoning. Everything we(humans) know is constrained by human perception and thought, stating the obvious then twisting it does not make discount the unpredictability of randomness.

And the part about it only being predictable if you know the algorithm was already stated in the sentence you quoted.

[sdv]

My belief is that the analog sound comes from the oscillators. If you were to run an analog oscillator through a digital filter, I believe it would still sound analog.

It's the opposite... the filters needs to be analog as they are what let those micro bits of "stray signal" through at the edges of the sound they receive from the oscillator. The "stray signal" for lack of a better word, is what creates the warmth.
An analog oscillator doesn't give you warmth, just an out-of-tune synth.

My guess is that the "stray signal" consists of:
1) harmonics of the pitch frequency degraded in amplitude by amount "x",
2) roll-off frequencies from the pitch frequency degraded in hertz by "y" (log or linear?).

If I were an engineer asshole I'd have the equipment to test all that, but I'm just a regular asshole.

[The Chase]

It's not random because you can predict what the value will be if given the seed and algorithm.

randomness just doesn't exists (do you believe in it?), everything has a cause. Here random rather means unpredictable for humans, and you can easily make an unpredictable random number generator on a PC. It would only be predictable if you had the algo, the random seed, and could, for ex, analyze 44100 random values per second in your analog head.

errr. That's faulty reasoning. Everything we(humans) know is constrained by human perception and thought, stating the obvious then twisting it does not make discount the unpredictability of randomness.

And the part about it only being predictable if you know the algorithm was already stated in the sentence you quoted.

Though his point was a bit irrelavent, he wasn't just "stating the obvious [and] then twisting it". He meant "randomness just doesn't exist" as in like when you flip a quarter, the outcome of its upside would be determined by:

A) the angles and velocity that it was flipped
B) the density, speed, and direction of the air the quarter travels through
C) the surfaces of the quarter and the ground it lands on
D) any other aspects that don't come to mind right now

so the outcome of the toss wouldn't be random, but rather unpredictable by humans.

Meow!
Chase