magiccarpetride;581951 Wrote: > I wasn't very clear in my previous explanation: it is not desirable to > use a DAC that will take the bit-perfect digital signal and just > faithfully convert it to analog signal. Why? Because the digital > source, when compared to the same analog source, sucks beyond belief. > The digital source is just a crude approximation, a crass caricature, > if you will, of the original analog signal that got captured by the > microphone and stored on the magnetic tape. Think of a digital audio > source as if being similar to an extremely pixelated photo. The DAC > needs to upconvert the harsh jagged edges into smooth curves. In order > to be able to do that, the DAC needs to be very creative, that is, > built with some ingenuity. > > The job of a DAC is to be resourceful and try to interpolate as much > musicality into that caricature of a signal. That's why bad DACs sound > like shit, because they're staying too close to the original choppy > digital information. It is very easy to build a DAC that will minimize > any distortion, but the end results are horrendous. Extremely grating > to the ears! > > Of course, no matter how much ingenuity we pour into the DACs, we will > never be able to match the musicality of an analog source. But, as > already evidenced by DACs such as Caiman, we're getting pretty darn > close:)Not in my universe but that's what makes this stuff fascinating.:-)
Kal -- Kal Rubinson ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Kal Rubinson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=40032 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82520 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
