Is a purely-analog chip possible without sampling?

I dunno, if I try and recall a piece of music, it does feel like I am actually recalling just certain "landmarks" and filling in the gaps. There are definately notes or sounds that I know are there and can reproduce accurately in my head, but I have no idea how the bassline goes, for example. In trying to remember a piece in totality, I can only really hear a fractured version of it, though my brain fills in a lot without my necessarily noticing.

But then isn't that how hearing works normally? I believe that the brain can only perceive 4 or 5 things at the same time - some people more, some less than this. You can try this with a simple experiment: Imagine yourself sitting in your car at a red traffic light. Then imagine thinking about youself sitting at this red traffic light. Then imagine thinking about thinking about yourself at this red light. Then imagine thinking about thinking about thinking about sitting at the red light. And so on. You can't get much further than this without losing track completely, since you need to hold each situation in your conciousness simultaneously for it all to make sense. In listening to music, you could only really be hearing a few things at the same time, and maybe certain bits trigger other emotional memories without us noticing exactly what is happening.

Other interesting research has suggested that the pleasure of walking through a beautiful landscape is not that we can see all this beautiful landscape, because that is not how we see things - we pick and store (very few) visual landmarks and fill in the rest. The pleasure is all about knowing that ALL the beautiful visual information is AVAILABLE, should we choose to look at it properly. Listening to/remembering music I would guess is quite similar. You can always listen to that bassline next time around.

Gareth.

You asked very much this same question, just over one year ago, in the sci.electronics.basics newsgroup.

You got a whole bunch of responses, which I believe covered the issue quite well.

I suggest that you go back and read the previous responses, rather than asking essentially the same question (in your usual ill-defined manner) once again.

Can analog audio chips [that obviously *do* use sampling] store the information in parallel?

This analog storage would be parallel RAM and thus the opposite of serial RAM shown below:

Is this parallel storage of analog RAM possible or do analog signals always have to be serial? Cassettes and phonos are serial.

if memory serves.

Was that a pun?

jak

It would have been had I been thinking that hard! ;-)

There are the old analogue 'bucket-brigade' chips, but that was an analogue form of sampling.

Time to up the meds again, maybe.

geoff

Me too...

geoff

You do know what a troll is, right?

MrT.

I know he is a troll (have said so many times) But do please tell me how that is "clever"? A pathological need for attention, regardless of ridicule, is more often considered an illness.

MrT.

Unless they could store fractions of electrons, then yes, they did.

Isaac

But of course, that is *precisely* how the original Ampex video disk slo-mo worked.

Isaac

Who can tell? But actually it's incorrect to reply to a troll at all.

intended

When talking about Radiums "questions" who can say?

state

I'm sorry, you seem to be under the misapprehension that I was being serious, or even more deluded into thinking Radium is! Hopefully you will know better next time :-)

MrT.

And

Then you rudely awaken when the cars behind start honking because the light has already turned green :-)

MrT.

Nearly. The Ampex unit didn't use a spiral track. It had "cylinders" each of which held one frame of videeo. There were four magnetic heads on arms that advanced in sequence -- 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, ...

Since each track (frame) could be played repeatedly, or even in reverse, slow-motion was easy.

It really was a brilliant piece of work, at the time.

Isaac

You seem willing to put considerable effort into dissing this person. Have you considered what this says about you?

Hey, I'm not dissing him, read what I wrote in the original context. Not to mention you seem to have missed the smiley altogether. Have a look at other peoples use of language if you want to see real venom on Usenet.

MrT.

Not necessarily, as the brain may be so busy with its maximum 4 or 5 things it is dealing with, that the honking is not noticed. This happens a lot - when you have been deep in thought, or working something out in your head, you may be able to recall that you weren't seeing anything at all. Untill someone clicks their fingers in front of your face and the visual processing starts up again.

Gareth.

Hey, that's probably why listening to music is so much better with your eyes closed - not processing visual information means there is one more aspect of the music you can concentrate on.

Gareth.

I saw your smiley. It might not be quite the get-out-of-jail-free card you seem to feel it is.

Do you actually intend to say that you should be excused because others are worse?