[HugodoubleTT]

No yet but the piggy bank is getting heavier.

Shame

 

[Amberlamps]

I’m sitting here wondering if P2Q has just figured out how to use a vpn to bypass border security.

 

[HugodoubleTT]

V moda with mojo is mind blowing. When I pass other joggers I'm bouncing higher

 

[Amberlamps]

V moda with mojo is mind blowing. When I pass other joggers I'm bouncing higher

I’m glad that you like them.

I was wondering, do you have a pair of meze empyrean headphones ?

 

[HugodoubleTT]

I’m glad that you like them.

I was wondering, do you have a pair of meze empyrean headphones ?

I wish ..well out of my price range

 

[Rob Watts]

I don't understand the taps.Can someone please tell me what the taps mean?

A tap is a single unit of processing for an FIR filter. To make an FIR filter, you need a delay line to store the samples, and then you multiply each sample by the filter coefficient and accumulate (add and store) the result. It's called a tap because early analogue FIR filters used analogue delay lines, and you would tap into the delay. Today of course it's digital, and you use SRAM memory to store previous samples.

The more taps you have, the more processing you do, and the more accurate the reconstruction is (with the right algorithm - it's pointless to increase the tap length using existing algorithms). With the M scaler for example, the coefficients are the same as ideal sinc function (if it's an ideal sinc filter it will perfectly reconstruct the original bandwidth limited analogue signal) to a better than 16 bit accuracy - but the only way of guaranteeing better than 16 bit reconstruction is to use a sinc function with 1M taps. Doubling the tap length with my WTA filter will double the reconstruction accuracy - that's why tap length is crucial for performance.

 

[miketlse]

Does that include sky hooks lol, I'm not that soft.When I was once an apprentice I was sent to the stores for a long stand

I guess you may have worked at Broughton.

 

[Tao8]

I’m only joking - I’m glad dave owners enjoy their kit.

And their transparency...
I’d love a dave, but surely dave 2 cant be too far away. I’ve seen 2 x daves second hand locally around recently at attractive pricing... it’s hard to know which way to go!

 

[Amberlamps]

And their transparency...
I’d love a dave, but surely dave 2 cant be too far away. I’ve seen 2 x daves second hand locally around recently at attractive pricing... it’s hard to know which way to go!

Thats what made me go for TT2 instead, but from the horses mouth dave 2 is not near as Dave’s are selling better now than they ever have.

I just didn’t like the idea of buying something that was a few years old technology wise, only to find out a year later it’s successor was away to come out.

Not that dave’s bad, I couldn:t say as I’ve never listened to one, mind you, if I saw a second hand perfect condition dave for say 4k, I would bite.

 

[Tao8]

Thanks Amberlamps. Perhaps I’m overthinking it and should just go a black TT2 to match in with the form factor of my m scaler... everything is just a grade of different and I could power my pap horns off the TT2 and a planned 13v Lifepo4 battery supply if the power goes out.

 

[Amberlamps]

Thanks Amberlamps. Perhaps I’m overthinking it and should just go a black TT2 to match in with the form factor of my m scaler... everything is just a grade of different and I could power my pap horns off the TT2 and a planned 13v Lifepo4 battery supply if the power goes out.

I have the tt2 and hms combo and although it may not be as transparent as dave, in other aspects it beats dave’s ass, but dave owners won’t admit it or can accept the fact that for £7500 rrp, TT2 and HMS combined laughs at Dave and tells him to **** and to go spend another £3500 or £8500 if he wants to sound better.

Fact!

I’m prepared for the deluge of dave owners posts and their insistence that it’s not true.

/inbound immune

 

[Whazzzup]

 

[Amberlamps]

A tap is a single unit of processing for an FIR filter. To make an FIR filter, you need a delay line to store the samples, and then you multiply each sample by the filter coefficient and accumulate (add and store) the result. It's called a tap because early analogue FIR filters used analogue delay lines, and you would tap into the delay. Today of course it's digital, and you use SRAM memory to store previous samples.



The more taps you have, the more processing you do, and the more accurate the reconstruction is (with the right algorithm - it's pointless to increase the tap length using existing algorithms). With the M scaler for example, the coefficients are the same as ideal sinc function (if it's an ideal sinc filter it will perfectly reconstruct the original bandwidth limited analogue signal) to a better than 16 bit accuracy - but the only way of guaranteeing better than 16 bit reconstruction is to use a sinc function with 1M taps. Doubling the tap length with my WTA filter will double the reconstruction accuracy - that's why tap length is crucial for performance.

When you say “better than 16 bit accuracy”, exactly how much better ? would it guarantee a perfect reconstruction of 24 bit tracks ? also and I’m looking into the future with this one, but would it also perfectly reconstruct a track that was 32bit ?

Would increasing the taps from 1 to 2 million with the sole intention to accurately reconstruct 24bit tracks, would that really be a distinct audible difference compared to using 1 million taps ?

Edit

Everyone, forget what you just read as it is a pile of schiit and I should of read up on the subject before pulling bits outta my ass and posting them.

Via Royal Mail.

 

[musickid]

Hey Deftone...sorry mate thought you were having a dig at me for no reason.

 

[Mediahound]

When you say “better than 16 bit accuracy”, exactly how much better ? would it guarantee a perfect reconstruction of 24 bit tracks ? also and I’m looking into the future with this one, but would it also perfectly reconstruct a track that was 32bit ?

Would increasing the taps from 1 to 2 million with the sole intention to accurately reconstruct 24bit tracks, would that really be a distinct audible difference compared to using 1 million taps ?

The 'better than 16bit accuracy' has to do with the output to your ears, not the source files.