Phil Leigh;362817 Wrote: > I am a designer of VERY large scale computer systems, and I'm more than > happy to state that lossless audio computer software doesn't behave > like analogue electronics! :o). There is no direct equivalent of > transfer loss or generation loss. > > There is no "sound processing", just lossless audio data processing. > This has been definitely proven many, many times. If you compare the > bits from the CD to what comes out - no matter what lossless chain is > in the way - the bits are the same. >
Don't get me wrong. I don't dispute that lossless is lossless. The word "lossless" is a definition of meaning and it simply CANNOT be disputed... I am not talking about theory, I am talking about practice. I am simply stating that, in real world systems, as you insert more "processing stuff" onto a lossless chain, you will eventually reach a level where things start to go pear shaped, and eventually the chain fails. e.g. the CPU can't handle the processing load, and has to drop or reschedule stuff in order to keep up; or the network has to drop packets. Even with your VERY large scale computer systems, I bet that it is eventually quite possible to add enough overhead to the system, to bring it down. C'mon you know this yourself :-) And when things like this do happen, the lossless chain becomes transformed into something that starts to look an awful lot like "lossy", where the only question is whether it becomes a total loss (the system freezes or crashes), a partial loss (dropped bits or packets), or a time loss (the data gets through eventually, but not in real time). -- AndrewFG Regards, AndrewFG ------------------------------------------------------------------------ AndrewFG's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15838 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=55442 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
