Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Something thats puzzeled me about burn in...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Something thats puzzeled me about burn in... - Page 3

post #31 of 38
Quote:
imagine an "s" shape made up of not a smooth line, but a series of tiny steps. this is essentially what happens to an analog sound when it is sampled.
i'm not sure on this one... but iirc, sample points are connected by a sin(x)/x pulse, so it doesn't look like steps but like an actual analog waveform.
post #32 of 38

NO Redshifter

Redshifter you've undoubtedly seen specially prepared graphs of waveforms designed to show where the individual samples are. But there are NO "steps" in the recovered waveform! NONE. The flat top of each step (if it existed in the final waveform) would require IMMENSE bandwidth to reproduce, because it would, in essence, be a "square wave". Square waves require ENORMOUS bandwidth!

Don't confuse graphs prepared to show where the steps are with the actual "shape" of the decoded waveform. It is NOT the same thing
post #33 of 38
skippy: Maybe what you describe is done later by digital or analogue filtering (or maybe this is true for pulse dacs - I don't know, and I'm not good at math ), but basically a multibit d/a-converter actually generates a stream of tiny little steps that follow the original waveform. Smoothing happens later on.

Greetings from SF!

Manfred / lini
post #34 of 38

You've got it Sirwar!

"It's the MUSIC, Stupid", as I keep pointing out

GREAT music on am radio beats mediocre music reproduced at an infinitely high resolution! If the music is good enough, mp3 is JUST FINE. Of course great music properly reproduced is even better. The the medium IS NOT THE MESSAGE! The MUSIC is the message!

I used to be an OBSESSIVE audiophile...tweaking vta and cartridge azimuth until I worried myself silly. I would jump up and run across the room during a listening session, because another tweak popped into my mind. I'm not quite sure how I cured myself of it, but I sure did. And I'm ENORMOUSLY thankful that I did. Because I can now GLEEFULLY listen to a song I love on a car radio, and turn off my high quality home system, or studio gear when the music I'm listening to is BAD (no matter how well recorded!)
post #35 of 38

Just not true, Lini!

I'm sorry Lini, but a series of tiny little steps IS NOT what's reproduced! A series of tiny little "steps" is what represents the waveform with a digital signal, ANY digital signal. But these "tiny little steps" through d/a conversion and filtration are decoded back into the original waveform, WITHOUT ANY "steps". If these "steps" were in the recovered waveform, they would show up as LOTS of distortion. And the distortion of cd is dozens, or even hundreds of times lower than even the best lp, and on par with a high quality amplifier (which is to say EXTREMELY low).

Saying something repeatedly doesn't make it so, Lini

Peace, Bro!
post #36 of 38

YEAH!

Quote:
Originally posted by Mike Walker
"It's the MUSIC, Stupid", as I keep pointing out

GREAT music on am radio beats mediocre music reproduced at an infinitely high resolution! If the music is good enough, mp3 is JUST FINE. Of course great music properly reproduced is even better. The the medium IS NOT THE MESSAGE! The MUSIC is the message!

I used to be an OBSESSIVE audiophile...tweaking vta and cartridge azimuth until I worried myself silly. I would jump up and run across the room during a listening session, because another tweak popped into my mind. I'm not quite sure how I cured myself of it, but I sure did. And I'm ENORMOUSLY thankful that I did. Because I can now GLEEFULLY listen to a song I love on a car radio, and turn off my high quality home system, or studio gear when the music I'm listening to is BAD (no matter how well recorded!)
WOW! I can do that and still listen to new formats without worrying which is better. As I said, its about the music AND the enjoyment of the experience. Proof is only necessary IF IT IS ABOUT THE FORMAT.

Quote:
Saying something repeatedly doesn't make it so, Lini
Seems like something I might have said many times during this thread
post #37 of 38
Mike: Uhm, not as far as I know. That's how I understood the principle of d/a-conversion: The d/a-converter only throws out this series of steps (talking of a multibit converter). But of course, that's not what's reproduced (did I claim that?): The steps are then smoothened to reproduce the original waveform by the filter stages following the dac. Am I wrong here?

Questions from SF!

Manfred / Lini
post #38 of 38
didn't mean to come off sounding pedantic there, folks. it's just that mike was assuming i was talking about volume levels, not sample rates.

to be honest, with modern (post 1995) redbook encoding techniques, i can not hear that "blender" effect. to hear what i am talking about find a poorly mastered cd or low bitrate mp3 with acoustic music on it. acoustic guitar is almost unrecognizable.

i don't really have a problem with well mastered redbook, but my original point was the high rez formats have more going for them than just wider dynamic range and wider frequency response.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Something thats puzzeled me about burn in...