On 16/08/06, Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I somehow doubt that there is much to gain from improving the A/D, > though. Seems to me that the real issue is noise already present in the > analogue signal, and also dynamic range limitations also on the analogue > side.
Absolute subtleties may be recorded with better resolution (ie noise floor which may lead to more effective post processing noise reduction) using an ADC of greater bit depth. However when compared to my experience in precision audio recording technologies I can honestly say that generally the quality of the source material is the absolute overriding quality constraining component in the recording chain. IE a cassette tape transcribed from the best cassette deck will sound no different when replayed from a 44kHz/16bit recording or a 196kHz/24bit recording. In other words if the output range of the sensor is being fully serviced by a 12 bit ADC then adding more resolution will do very very little to improve the final output. And the fact that we are likely to see a sensor of higher pixel density than the 6.1MP APC sensor that we are so used to if theory is to be believed we will only see poorer noise performance. Anyone who has bought the new improved model of a film scanner which ultimately still used the same sensor but ramped the ADC up from 14 to 16 bits per pixel will probably appreciate my position. I'm all for maintaining an open mind but physics being what it is leaves me doubting about the potential for radical improvement under the circumstances. I can't see me selling off my 67 gear just yet. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
