pnielsen;205806 Wrote: > No. That's not right. > > In an old analog device, 0dB usually represents a threshold value of > some sort. Usually this value is set for the level when distortion > reaches a certain treshold value. Thus, in analog electronics 0dB does > not represent the maximum possible value, it should only be considered > the maximum "recommended" value under known circumstances. If you're going to be pedantic, then we may as well go the whole hog. 0VU is *defined* to be 1mW across 600ohms (at 1kHz), which is about 0.775V. Whether that equates to 0dBFS depends on the voltage output by the DAC.
And a VU meter is *required* to be an averaging device with a response time of 300ms. So if 0VU *did* equate to 0dBFS, a VU meter monitoring a digital signal would never reach 0 on normal musical programme material. pnielsen;205806 Wrote: > In a digital world, 0dB represents the maximum signal POSSIBLE (the > maximum value is well defined by the maximal bit value possible). The > meter range should end right there, as you cannot exceed 0dB digitally > as you can in an analog electric signal. What you're asking for is a peak level meter calibrated against the digital signal. That's not a VU meter. pnielsen;205806 Wrote: > I LOVE the retro-style meters, by why would the dB-scale have to be a > scientific abomination? Adjusting the scale won't make it less retro, > will it? Yes it will. People expect VU meters to occasionally go "into the red". It's part of their (retro) behaviour. (PS. I hate the look of the VU meters!) -- cliveb Transporter -> ATC SCM100A ------------------------------------------------------------------------ cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=35742 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
