darrenyeats wrote: > Some dodgy technical claims in recent posts. > > 1. DACs with ">16 bit performance" don't keep that performance when > employing digital volume control (to be clear I'm not arguing against > digital volume control, in fact I'm a fan, nevertheless the observation > stands). > > 2. In audio recording and reproduction the signal passes through a long > chain of processes and components. Even if one component could be > transparent, it could still play its part in audible artifacts in an > ensemble. I can think of mic, mic preamp, ADC, studio digital effects > (multiple, perhaps many), mixing, mastering, downsampling, DAC, preamp, > amp, active crossover. That's 11 off the top of my head. Stack 11 > transparent windows upon each other, they may very well not be > transparent. Even if transparency was achievable for a component in > isolation, that's not actually good enough. > > Darren
1. In practice I think it's ok the best practical DAC's are 20-21 bits anyway so chucking the first 4 bits does nothing . And hearing better than >16 bits is very hard so but already the volume starts to get low . And then when you starts nagging at the 16 bits the volume is really low ( if the gain of system is properly set up ) and with modern dither it expresses itself as random noise . I'm also a fan of digital volume . The one in the squeezeboxes are undithered ? So I use that with care , but the one in my meridian system is dithered properly . This is a bit academic these issues are greatly prefered before an analog volume pot with all its nonlinearities ,channel balance anyone ? Now try that with a digital 5.1 system with active xover that's 11 volume controls that should track precisely I don't see any other solution than going digital . And the noise floor on many recordings is bordering on something like 13 bits anyway..... 2. Yes i'm with you over design in the whole path is preferable , the recording engineer may for example not do a good job and don't fully utilise the performance of his kit . So this is designed in marginal . I'm very happy with components with >100dB snr . Stacking components with 70db snr would not be good . Besides depending on system gain you may amplify input noise everywhere . Analogy ,PA systems they have excellent snr ,but if you are close to the speakers you hear noise and hum anyway , the gain is massive ( when the band starts playing I usually back off a couple of rows to not shot my ear completely :) ) But you can't asses that with sighted wine taster like testing :) hence measurements is necessary when the individual components are below our hearing threshold . -------------------------------------------------------------------- Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4 Misc use: Radio (with battery) iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad (spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller ) server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=103842 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
