Charlie,

>>50K or so at 32 bit depth

I thought the standard for recording CD's was 44KHz, 16 bit? Some say this is not enough to properly reproduce a waveform.

>>Analog can not even begin to approach the frequency response of digital or >>live.

Of course, but most people can't hear above 16Khz. I know I have measured lots of drivers with my analyzer and my ear always give out around that point. As for the lows, the ears low frequency response is very nonlinear and in most listening rooms the lows are dominated by standing waves. So the frequency extremes are not an issue.

>>Period. Now, whether that analog coloring is pleasing to the ears in general >>or to an individual, again is subjective, but is simply not as close to the >>real thing as high quality (beyond CD) digital.

Beyond CD? A thought we were comparing CD to records?

>>FWIW - I also "like" the colored, imperfect, analog sound on many things- >>most of all coming out of my old Hammond B-3 and Leslie 122!

Its the dominance of even order harmonics that accounts for the superior sound of tubes. The are more pleasing to the human ear. I'm not a musician, but I hear most guitarists still prefer the sound of tubes.

The weakest link in the audio chain is the loudspeaker. It can serverly alter the frequency response and filter networks higher than 1st order cause phase distortion. Even 1st order filters are only minimum phase at the design point. However, the audability of phase distortion is a topic that is hotly debated by experts.

Charlie