Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:15:34 GMT
That would mean then, that the connectors used are true 75ohm connectors? Typical "nice"digital cables still use RCA plugs which are certainly not a 75 ohm plug.Perhaps you are using 75 ohm BNC plugs and sockets at both ends ? My understanding is that a 1.5M length is considered about optimum. A poor impedance match has been shown to increase Jitter.Use of a 75 ohm attenuator has been shown by RG member John Kenny to markedly reduce reflections thus reducing Jitter,provided that the level is adequate.There has been a series of high bandwidth CRO photos published showing this. www.diyaudio.com/forums/vendors-bazaar/176255-enjoythemusic-review-jkeny-modified-hiface.html |
|
|
|
Post by lark on Jun 21, 2011 10:21:07 GMT
That would mean then, that the connectors used are true 75ohm connectors? Typical "nice"digital cables still use RCA plugs which are certainly not a 75 ohm plug.Perhaps you are using 75 ohm BNC plugs and sockets at both ends ? My understanding is that a 1.5M length is considered about optimum. No, probably not (they are RCA) - but the tolerance is fine and they work perfectly - all my bits get through unharmed  - If it didn't I'd lose clock sync and get lots of nasties happening - eek! But I don't Nearly all (but not all) spdif audio equipment comes with RCA connectors as it is within the designed tolerances of the technology and is commonly available. |
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Jun 22, 2011 5:40:51 GMT
Now if THIS doesn't qualify as religion what does ?   Oh, audio religions, subjective or objective, don't solve the problem. No even when we go to the church, mosque, etc to confess on it. If solved, why are we still spending so much time here? GOD can and GOD is not religion but the ONE and ONLY almighty for GAIA that the problematic people preach as religions in various form factors. It's still the same GOD, IMVHO. So religion is not created by GOD but by people. How can it be a religion when there is only one TRUE and RIGHT way to solve the problem thru GOD? It's only when we have variety that we can say religion will come in. GOD told you GOD is religion or cult, har? GOD only tells us to choose the righter values and be good in all circumstances. Whether you choose or not, GOD will not force us to for us unworthy souls on earth. Does GOD asked us to be cultish like religion? One truth and nothing but the one truth is religion, har? Hmmm, still being fooled, eh? May GOD help us! Amen, Amitabha, Allah!  |
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Jun 22, 2011 6:08:04 GMT
Perhaps, to further the cause for this to understand the matter better in digital audio, if based on just 1, 2, 3, etc to represent the musical wave, how do digital represent say 1.00001, 1.02 which an analog system can fully represent? If the digital system can't represent those, we are already losing musical data or resolution like mp3.
There is a lot of talk about digital being perfect system but if based on to represent a continous analog music wave, what do we to say? Perhaps in computing, that's A-Ok as we don't need to represent something of the in between nature. But when we come to an analog musical waveform, which in TRUE form is a CONTINOUS WAVEFORM, how can something like digital, which in TRUE form is a DISCRETE WAVEFORM REPRESENTATION, correctly and effectively do a task that is in real form continous?
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Jun 22, 2011 6:16:51 GMT
Yeah, also, since digital is all about 1s and 0s and pretty error free as the design has compensation inbuild, all dacs should sound the same as we are not dealing anything in analog. If this is the case, there wouldn't be another religious argument on dacs sounding different. Also, all will go for the best spec cheap dac as designed by say our dear Frans. There wouldn't be another round of say which sounds better. Sabre 32 vs TDA 1574 vs Wolfson vs BB 1792 etc chips. Ha, ha, I don't need to go to pow-wows any more. I'm sure Lark and our dear Prof Frans had heard the differences between those chips and still are.  |
|
|
|
Post by lark on Jun 22, 2011 9:00:05 GMT
Yeah, also, since digital is all about 1s and 0s and pretty error free as the design has compensation inbuild, all dacs should sound the same as we are not dealing anything in analog. No, the DAC is the exit point of the digital domain and the entry point into the analogue domain - that is, the DAC must take a well defined digital value (a number and time value) and create an analogue representation of it. There is also the timing aspect of the DAC, it works on clock cycles so the more precise the clock the more precise the output. See these pages for more in depth detail: Digital Audio, Analog to Digital and Pulse code modulationThis is why the DAC is probably the most important part of the digital chain - it's where thing can really start to go bad. |
|
|
|
Post by lark on Jun 22, 2011 9:25:41 GMT
Perhaps, to further the cause for this to understand the matter better in digital audio, if based on just 1, 2, 3, etc to represent the musical wave, how do digital represent say 1.00001, 1.02 which an analog system can fully represent? If the digital system can't represent those, we are already losing musical data or resolution like mp3. Well, as you'll see from my previous post, digital audio is typically represented using whole numbers, the number of bits determines the resolution (or the granularity of steps if you prefer) as explained here: Analog-to digital converter ResolutionAlso note, analogue can not what I'd call 'fully represent' floating point numbers (1.00001 etc) analogue (as the word implies) is an interpretation, approximation and is analogous to what it is representing - ie not exact! As you'll see from this link above, computers use more than one way to represent floating point numbers, most common today is IEEE 754. Floating point numbers on computers are typically comprised of three parts, the sign bit (is this number + or -), the exponent field (the magnitude of the number, sort-of-a multiplier), and the significand (mantissa) (the detail part). One consequence of this though is that computers can not represent every floating point number, they can only represent an approximation of some - but this is rarely an issue in they way they are used, I won't go into the gory details here, but you typically don't test for equality (are two numbers equal) when dealing with floating point numbers, you test if they are close enough using what's often referred to an epsilon value. But there is much more to it than that. Computers don't use floating point numbers for audio as it's not needed and it's much more expensive (CPU time wise) to compute. No there is no loss of quality like MP3's, the problem with MP3's is they throw away some of the data which is believed to be less perceivable - let's not get into that discussion here though, there's so much that can be said about MP3's or lossy compression and some of the misconceptions etc. The info above should cover your concerns here and why it doesn't apply or make sense in terms of how digital audio works. |
|
rowuk
Been here a while! 
Pain in the ass, ex-patriot yank living in the land of sauerkraut
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by rowuk on Jun 22, 2011 19:27:41 GMT
The filtering returns the in-between values. The digital approximation which is the matrix in time by the sampling frequency and the amplitude by the bit rate. This stepped waveform is smoothed and what is left is many times a MUCH more accurate approximation than with almost all analog methods of storage.
Where does analog fail?
1) inaccurate mirroring of the record pre-emphasis
2) tape hiss - which can also modulate the waveform
3) compression/distortion/damage to the record groove
4) limit on high frequency response by the tape head gap
5) wow and flutter
6) resonance of the phono cartridge
7) bleed through on older tapes
8) deterioration of vinyl
9) resonance of the "vintage" microphones
10) use of springs, gold foil for reverb
11) analog equalizers in the studio that mangled phase response
12) Rumble
Granted, analog can sound VERY good. Let's just not dream the limitations away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2011 21:57:26 GMT
The filtering returns the in-between values. The digital approximation which is the matrix in time by the sampling frequency and the amplitude by the bit rate. This stepped waveform is smoothed and what is left is many times a MUCH more accurate approximation than with almost all analog methods of storage. Where does analog fail? 1) inaccurate mirroring of the record pre-emphasis 2) tape hiss - which can also modulate the waveform 3) compression/distortion/damage to the record groove 4) limit on high frequency response by the tape head gap 5) wow and flutter 6) resonance of the phono cartridge 7) bleed through on older tapes 8) deterioration of vinyl 9) resonance of the "vintage" microphones 10) use of springs, gold foil for reverb 11) analog equalizers in the studio that mangled phase response 12) Rumble Granted, analog can sound VERY good. Let's just not dream the limitations away. Robin A nice brief summing up. For those who think that tapes don't have problems too, then the attached link may be of interest. In this one they don't mention " self bias"with increasing frequency though, which is possibly more important with lower speed domestic type tape recorders. Alex www.aes.org/aeshc/docs/3mtape/soundtalk/soundtalkv1n2.pdf |
|
rowuk
Been here a while!
Pain in the ass, ex-patriot yank living in the land of sauerkraut
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by rowuk on Jun 22, 2011 23:06:24 GMT
It's not like digital doesn't have its own set of problems. Any artifacts from less than optimum playback are very far away from the sound of real instruments. Alot of online music is also at a far lower resolution than earlier CD or analog productions. With the advent of cheap DSP, the hacks really butcher pop productions to feed the kiddies - no pride anymore.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2011 11:40:17 GMT
In this thesis you assume a GOD does exist and is 'interfering' and communicating with the human race AND I suspect the rest of this vast universe. The probabilities of that are about equal to hearing actual differences between 100m of copper an 99.5m of copper with 0.5m of silver inbetween it somewhere. GOD MAY merely be an 'invention' of mankind to explain the unexplained or have 'ruling' advantages over those with less knowledge in this matter... but ofcourse the things I wrote are my opinions and not the absolute truth. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2011 11:46:28 GMT
I COULD write a number of words about it, but Lark already did.
The thesis above is incorrect and use audiosoftware and vieuw the dB meters to notice that in the quitest moments of any recording (be it analog or digital) the noise floor is always MUCH higher (30 to even 50dB) as to what can be registerd in hires digital.
meaning the smallest possible signal in audio is smaller then the noise (which is a random ting) so the smallest analog signals simply cannot be resolved in any analog method.
Digital can resolve FAR FAR more than analog can..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2011 11:52:12 GMT
Can't speak for Lark but I don't know IF I have heard those (certainly don't do much in that field) and , for me, if it measures within the boundaries I know I can perceive I really do not care at all which method is used.
I can't nor am willing to perceiev the subjective perceived differences by others.
The measured differences (which there will be) are most likely too small to be perceived.
In any case by me... cannot speak for the subjectivsist ofcourse as these WILL perceive quite noticeabel differences.
Boy am I glad I don't, it saves me a LOT of money and trouble and leaves time to enjoy life instead of wondering IF things could be better if I did this or bought that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2011 12:21:07 GMT
I COULD write a number of words about it, but Lark already did. The thesis above is incorrect and use audiosoftware and vieuw the dB meters to notice that in the quitest moments of any recording (be it analog or digital) the noise floor is always MUCH higher (30 to even 50dB) as to what can be registerd in hires digital. meaning the smallest possible signal in audio is smaller then the noise (which is a random ting) so the smallest analog signals simply cannot be resolved in any analog method. Digital can resolve FAR FAR more than analog can.. My experience has been that many of HD Tracks high res albums that were originally analogue recordings, more often than not,made using valve based electronics, have a noise floor not much better than -60dB This is far short of digital system capability. Alex |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2011 14:36:26 GMT
Indeed that's exactly what I said.. a noise floor of 44/16 is around 90dB and 192/24 around 110dB. So when you add 30 dB (CD) you would have a noise floor of -60dB with hires files and 110dB noise floor add 50dB and arrive at -60dB noise flloors. It is simply limited because of noise properties of microphone amps that are used. you cannot go around that, perhaps lower it a bit or use noise gates, which can be 'heard' if not set to the proper level, this is very annoying to hear once you know WHAT that sounds like. Can be clearly seen with audiosoftware as well Some recordings have higher noise floors even upto -80 dB or so but (hearable) noise gates are used or other techniques to reduce noise. vinyl and tape have even worse figures .... any CD shits all over it in resolution and noise floor. Any 192/24 shits all over any analog recording even in FR perhaps even 96/16 already. so anything that can be recorded on any analog medium will be described very accurately in digital. even the noise, and sounds disappearing in that noise, that cannot be perceived as it is overruled by noise. posting in the wrong thread it's about SSD for HiFi... |
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyBlue on Jun 23, 2011 18:32:49 GMT
This seems like a good place to ask which USB A to USB B cable I should get, to go with my Aune Mini USB DAC (I've only got the freeby ones that come bundled with equipment).
Suggestions, please ( ...dons tin helmet and ducks below parapet... ).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2011 19:15:40 GMT
I say use those... they were purpose made...
Not very audiophile thinking but might save you the trouble of having to search relentlessly finding THE perfect cable and a LOT of money.
Buy yourself a nice bottle of wine from the savings and use that to alter the listening experience.
|
|
rowuk
Been here a while!
Pain in the ass, ex-patriot yank living in the land of sauerkraut
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by rowuk on Jun 23, 2011 20:06:43 GMT
I say use those... they were purpose made... Not very audiophile thinking but might save you the trouble of having to search relentlessly finding THE perfect cable and a LOT of money. Buy yourself a nice bottle of wine from the savings and use that to alter the listening experience. Don't forget that wine tastes different depending on the glass it is served in, the temperature and how many that you had before. Kind of like Audio......... |
|
rowuk
Been here a while!
Pain in the ass, ex-patriot yank living in the land of sauerkraut
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by rowuk on Jul 27, 2011 5:33:00 GMT
Here is a heretical thought:
When I drink wine, go to a concert or have great sex I am NOT looking for exactly the same experience each time. The slight differences in timing, taste, volume, etc. all lead to a "new" experience each time. As time passes only the peaks are remembered - good and bad.
I am positive that if we get "Perfect" reproduction recognized by all, someone will have to come up with a "humanize" link to prevent boredom. Perhaps an Eargasm should NOT be something based on bit perfect to the brain reproduction?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2011 7:07:16 GMT
Funnily enough, 'Humanise' is a function used on computer music software in order to introduce random, tiny timing errors so that it sounds like human fingers are playing. However, if anyone asks, you'd normally rant on about how long it took to get it right!!!
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Jul 28, 2011 4:13:00 GMT
Funnily enough, 'Humanise' is a function used on computer music software in order to introduce random, tiny timing errors so that it sounds like human fingers are playing. However, if anyone asks, you'd normally rant on about how long it took to get it right!!! That's what it's all about in REAL good sounding music! Even Nathan has some sort of digital tube function to get the tube vibrant sound. No wonder his sample music files sound very good.  |
|
rowuk
Been here a while!
Pain in the ass, ex-patriot yank living in the land of sauerkraut
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by rowuk on Aug 6, 2011 16:34:29 GMT
So the original question got lost in the digital domain. I guess it is not that perfect after all.
Advantage to the SSD in my system:
faster boot
faster data transfer - more channels for cubase
Macbook runs about 30 minutes longer than with the 10K RPM disc
Silent
faster backups (RSync) over eSATA to an external eSATA SSD drive
Can't make any claims about SQ. I don't have the time to compare. I can say it is not worse.
The joy of a much more responsive system is enough justification to switch. Boot is now <15 seconds, programs start almost instantaneously. This is FUN. This is what 21st century computing should be like.
My drive: Crucial M4 128GB
Why: Mac compatibility out of the box. I have a Mac because I do not want to muck with the hardware - I earn money with it!
|
|
xerxes
Been here a while!
Posts: 1,115
|
Post by xerxes on Aug 8, 2011 11:15:41 GMT
That's why it should always be drunk straight from the bottle. |
|
rowuk
Been here a while!
Pain in the ass, ex-patriot yank living in the land of sauerkraut
Posts: 1,011
|
Post by rowuk on Aug 8, 2011 13:48:59 GMT
That's why it should always be drunk straight from the bottle. A terrorist in every sense of the word. Bottle indeed! |
|
- If it didn't I'd lose clock sync and get lots of nasties happening - eek! But I don't 
