Julf wrote:
And even if you hit that very special +11 dB beast, all that happens is
that you clip one sample period. How much clipping was there in that
Iggy recording again? :)
Yup. And since we're upsampling, the duration of that sample period is
even briefer.
Had a look at the effect on the ASUS Essence One which has a symettric
upsampling feature. So 44.1kHz material is upsampled 8x to 352.8kHz.
No upsampling - square wave, 0dBFS, 1.00227 kHz:
14787
With 8x upsampling - square wave, 0dBFS, 1.00227 kHz:
14788
Nice :-)
Harmonics remain clean and I
The most common view, when I google it, is to connect the shield only at
the *source* end, to avoid ground loops, which seems reasonable.
Gandhi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=58909
View this
Somehow i can´t believe that just comes froms integer/non- integer.
Isn´t it that you get such spikes as the DAC1 shows when you ignore
dither?
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View
Gandhi wrote:
The most common view, when I google it, is to connect the shield only at
the *source* end, to avoid ground loops, which seems reasonable.
And the ideal scheme is to use floating, fully differential inputs and
balanced connections, and keep signal ground and safety earth
Wombat wrote:
Somehow i can´t believe that just comes froms integer/non- integer.
Isn´t it that you get such spikes as the DAC1 shows when you ignore
dither?
edit: For example the dithered/non-dithered pics of this SRC
http://shibatch.sourceforge.net/ssrc/
Maybe... I'll have a look at
EricBergan wrote:
You know, I just saw there were not one but two (serious journal) recent
papers suggesting the speed of light might not be a hard constant, so
there you go...
Good point but not really applicable since sound travels at the speed of
sound (DUH!) and not at the speed of
ralphpnj wrote:
Good point but not really applicable since sound travels at the speed of
sound (DUH!) and not at the speed of light.
I am assuming that the comment from EricBergan was humorous.
Julf's Profile:
Julf wrote:
I am assuming that the comment from EricBergan was humorous.
Oops! Sorry. I think I need some kind of guide which indicates which
forum members are Kool-Aid drinking die-hard audiophiles who love all of
HP's Super-Discs and which members listen to real music.
ralphpnj wrote:
Oops! Sorry. I think I need some kind of guide which indicates which
forum members are Kool-Aid drinking die-hard audiophiles who love all of
HP's Super-Discs and which members listen to real music.
But see, now we can not only have time clock variation jitter on
TOSLINK, we
EricBergan wrote:
But see, now we can not only have time clock variation jitter on
TOSLINK, we can also have varying speed of light effecting the audio
quality!
:-)
Ah! But if, wait, not if but WHEN the audio quality is being adversely
affected by the varying speed of light we need a name
ralphpnj wrote:
my suggestion is the Einstein effect
'XKCD: Einstein' (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/einstein.png)
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread:
Julf wrote:
'XKCD: Einstein' (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/einstein.png)
Does one to be a real audiophile to understand the comic?
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this
A few measurements over the weekend with various power cords.
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/05/measurements-power-cables-for-low-power.html
Have a good week everyone...
Archimago's Profile:
Archimago wrote:
A few measurements over the weekend with various power cords.
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/05/measurements-power-cables-for-low-power.html
Have a good week everyone...
Perhaps it's time to change the name of this thread: Real World Audio
Testing for the Real People
ralphpnj wrote:
Does one to be a real audiophile to understand the comic?
I don't think a real audiophile would get it at all. It is making fun
(among other things) of the argument by appeal to authority by
pointing out that taking every statement Einstein ever made as literal
declarations of
Julf wrote:
I don't think a real audiophile would get it at all. It is making fun
(among other things) of the argument by appeal to authority by
pointing out that taking every statement Einstein ever made as literal
declarations of truth is very silly indeed.
This is a very important point,
darrell wrote:
These values, demanding proof for claims made, respect for evidence,
thinking for oneself, etc, should be much more widely taught. Then the
world, never mind the consumer audio industry, might be a better place.
So true. Proof and evidence instead of simply opinion.
darrell wrote:
These values, demanding proof for claims made, respect for evidence,
thinking for oneself, etc, should be much more widely taught. Then the
world, never mind the consumer audio industry, might be a better place.
garym wrote:
So true. Proof and evidence instead of simply
Interesting thread...
I am a big fan of Ray Charles (I know very well his records) and I am
quite an old school ears guy (preferring old uncompressed (dynamically)
standards to modern production).
But I find this Genius love company quite well produced for a modern
prod, regardless of artistic
ralphpnj wrote:
I beg to differ - often it is not opinion which is being stated but
simply pure misinformation. Misinformation is very useful to those who
are trying to get someone else to buy something that they really don't
need. For example a $500 USB cable. Misinformation is also useful
garym wrote:
I don't disagree. But even ignoring the intentional spread of FUD and
misinformation (for money), I'd even settle for more reliance on facts,
evidence, and rigor by folks that don't have money on the table. The
false equivalence of two sides to a question that the media seems
Science which doesn't follow the evidence, wherever it leads, without
fear or favour, is not science in my opinion. The uses to which it is
put, of course, is an entirely different question.
garym - I completely agree, it drives me crazy, and more often than
sometimes! It astounds me that
Julf wrote:
I don't think a real audiophile would get it at all.
what is your definition of an audiophile?
netchord's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21002
View this thread:
netchord wrote:
what is your definition of an audiophile?
Perhaps, people, like the White Queen in -Through the Looking Glass-,
who can believe 6 impossible things before breakfast, and who encourage
the same in others?
Alice laughed: There's no use trying, she said; one can't believe
darrell wrote:
Perhaps, people, after the White Queen in -Through the Looking Glass-,
who can believe 6 impossible things before breakfast, and who encourage
the same in others?
I think you've nailed the definition. Never thought of this, but it fits
perfectly.
ralphpnj wrote:
Perhaps it's time to change the name of this thread: Real World Audio
Testing for the Real People Living in the Real World
;-)
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
garym wrote:
And by the way, the word audiophile only has negative connotation for
me.
Me, too. The democratisation of audio, via computers, the internet,
and particularly the open source movement, is what did it for me. The
days of high priests with a monopoly on the knowledge and technology
darrell wrote:
Perhaps, people, after the White Queen in -Through the Looking Glass-,
who can believe 6 impossible things before breakfast, and who encourage
the same in others?
garym wrote:
I think you've nailed the definition. Never thought of this, but it fits
perfectly.
edit: And
29 matches
Mail list logo
