--- In [email protected], "i2phd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ciao Claudio, > > I do perfectly agree with you. The only problem is that if you take > two different persons, they react differently to a non linear phase > response caused by the non constant group delay in the crystal > filters. It's here where it starts the subjective part of the > issue.... we can measure the group delay, but we can't tell anything > about the effect that it will have on the listeners, as each of them > will have a different perceived sensation of the quality of that > audio.... what characterize an human being is his lack of > predictability (and I would add, Thanks God...) > > 73 Alberto I2PHD
Hi Alberto - There was something in Claudio's post that is more along the lines of my earlier post: ________________________ "With Ciao Radio when it is used in AM with the AM demodulator that implement the law of the envelope detector you clearly see the distortion coming in the spectrum window of the demodulated signal (even with dynamic signals). When you use the coherent AM demodulator of Ciao Radio , you don't have this distortion and the signal is clearer . This is amplitude non linearity." __________________________ We all assume that the better sound of the SDR is due to the dsp filters, and the overwhelming portion may just be that. BUT, if one can "see" the improvement we all know is there in going from an envelope type detector to a better type, could we not also use this technology to "see" subtle differences in the various "better" detectors (sync and others) and whether there is an even cleaner sound to be had from improved detector algorithms? It can be easy when something makes a great deal of improvement, to get caught up in celebration, and ignore other lesser, but perhaps valuable opportunities. I am just trying to ascertain whether more experimentation with detector algorithms could be fruitful... My best to you, Bob
