Re: MD: The French Horn Glitch - Urban legend
Martin Schiff wrote: As I suspected, this story seems to be an urban legend (at least based on my tests). I used your file LoHorn.wav and recorded it digitally on my Sharp The first time this problem was discussed on the list, it was a completely different sound that caused it. I can't remember who discovered it but I can remember the sound - it was a bassy percussive type sound that sounded very synthesized, and I just thought that the synthetic nature of the sound was what caused it, ie. a strange waveform that the psychoacoustic model couldn't handle somehow. When the French Horn recording problem was then discovered, it eliminated that possibility because it was directly from a microphone. I'd also like to add that I didn't discover the problem, but followed it up with a second test when the original French Horn player (who's name I also don't remember) discovered it. I was able to reproduce the noise using my cousin's 722, using a digital link from a SB Live. I guess there's a possibility that not all units are affected - there may have been a bad batch of ATRAC chips that found their way into production. Intel seem to be able to do it all the time, why not Sharp? -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Atrac-bug (French horn solo)
Joost de Meij wrote: I downloaded both files, and played them in Winamp... The first file (LoHorn) sounded fine, but when i played the second file (Horn722), i almostly blew my speakers!!! Horn722 is the result of recording LoHorn on a 722 that I have available to me. There were no download errors - you just heard the result of this bug. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: The French Horn Glitch - Urban legend
Martin Schiff wrote: If you have to go to that much trouble to reproduce this problem, then the chances that it will occur randomly during a recording seem pretty slim. No? It happened the first time that sound sample was recorded when I tested it. No need for looping or anything, just record it from start to finish. I guess another factor that must be considered is whether the PC is playing the file at exactly the right speed. If the speed is wrong the pitch will change and the problem may not show up. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: The French Horn Glitch (was: Sharp 701/702s for 99 Pounds at RS)
Eric Woudenberg wrote: Before this problem reaches Urban Legend status, I wonder if anyone has a copy of this French Horn signal that the Sharp supposedly has trouble with. I'd like to see if we can reproduce it. I remember having it at one time and recording it on my MZ-R50 without any problems. I still have it available on my site along with a pic of the waveform: The original file: www.ozemail.com.au/~atrac/LoHorn.wav The same file recorded on a 722: www.ozemail.com.au/~atrac/Horn722.wav A pic of the waveform: www.ozemail.com.au/~atrac/badwav.jpg -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Mini Disc Purchase
Dan Frakes wrote: But doesn't the MS-702 have an older version of Sharp's ATRAC? My impression was that the 722 and other post-702 MDs had a newer version. If this is the case, then you would really need to do a side-by-side comparison of the 722 and a Sony unit. The 722 DOES exhibit the ATRAC bug that appears when recording the French horn. I now have access to an 831 so when I get some time I'll try recording the same sound on it to see if it also exhibits the bug. I have done a fair bit of listening to both Sony and Sharp ATRAC recordings and although my ears are far from golden, I have heard undesirable compression artifacts on some Sharp recordings that are simply not there with the same material on a Sony. I have never heard an artifact on a Sony recording. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: disc capacity (was-Re: Name Full!!!)
Steven Brooks wrote: In reference to the part of the paragraph that's "carroted" (i.e., "...write over titling space to increase capacity") -- how would you go about doing that? I'd love to fit in a few more songs, and often find the Given that the titling space is around 1700 characters, and on the assumption that each character is represented by one byte (8 bits), writing ATRAC audio in this space would allow an extra 1/20 of a second of audio. Somehow I don't think it would be worthwhile going to the effort of tricking a deck into using this space. The tricks that allow extra recording time on blanks actually create TOC entries that point to areas of the disc before and after the specified 74m 59s recording area. This means that the equipment is forced to read from and write to the disc in areas beyond the normal specs for sled travel and it can cause problems. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: (OT) graphic cards
"Shawn M. Pierce" wrote: areas. Their drivers are some of the worst availible, not only does it take them 6 months to release a viable MSHQ certified driver, but they also cannot release a viable OpenGL ICD. For any games, the Matrox cards bite the big one. They are slow and ungainly. U can buy much better card by The G400 scores better in both image quality and frame rates than any NVidia card with many Direct3D apps, and the poor old Voodoos get left behind once 32 bit colour is demanded. G400s handle very high resolutions better than anything else. The TNTs frame rates drop markedly over 1280x1024, allowing the G400 to surpass it. Who cares if the G400 is 20fps behind at 640x480, when we're talking about 90 or so fps anyway. Yes, Matrox got their fingers burnt by never releasing a decent OpenGL ICD for the G200, but the situation is vastly different for the G400. A working ICD ships with the card which only lags behind the competition due to its newness. Matrox have learnt their lesson, and are working very hard to get a high performance OpenGL ICD out. I personally have a GeForce 256 (Creative Labs Annihilator). I play Quake, Quake3, Unreal Tournament, and many other games. I also use my The G400 dual head feature rocks, lets see you run Combat Flight Sim on your monitor, while watching the maps on your TV screen with your GeForce. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Hesitating sound, graphic cards
"J. Coon" wrote: What cards do you recommend? Matrox ... period. I have an original Millennium 2MB in this PC, and a 32MB G400 dual-head in my games PC. Matrox cards have no peers. -cb Disclaimer: The above is my opinion, YMMV. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: 80 Min MD's Live from Manufacturer
Yann LEZY wrote: J'en ai trouve ici et la, principalement a la Fnac (dont pas forcement donnes, mais bon). Je n'ai pas non plus cherche dans toutes les Fnacs, mais la Fnac Velizy2 en a. Yep, couldn't agree more ... errr, I think maybe. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: randomness
Jeffrey Lan wrote: first of all... there has only been one MD portie with optical outSony's MZ-R1. This is a common mistake and it bugs me to death ... aaargh! Sony's porty that had optical out was the MZ-1, note no 'R' in there. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Level-Sync at 0 dB (was analog recording levels)
Magic wrote: It's not entirely the same as setting level sync off - remember that the unit will start recording when a signal hits 0dB. I agree it's pointless though to me anyway... I think there's a bit of confusion here regarding the purpose of level-sync. Level-sync is the name given to the function that inserts track marks when a pre-determined signal level is reached. Music-sync starts the recording when the level is reached, and Smart-Space reduces the duration of passages that are below this level. I assume that Music-Sync is also affected by the Level-Sync threshold setting, but the behaviour of Level-Sync with a 0dB threshold and Music-Sync switched off will not be to start recording when the level reaches 0dB. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Level-Sync at 0 dB (was analog recording levels)
"David W. Tamkin" wrote: The JE520 has it as well, defaulting from the factory at -50 dB. As to set- ting it to 0 dB, that's equivalent to turning Level-Sync off, isn't it, and No it isn't. The level sync threshold is the level below which the music must go for a predetermined time before again rising to that threshold, at which point a track mark is inserted. If set to 0dB, a track mark would be inserted every time a 0dB peak occured with the requisite time since the last peak. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: DC surges, a warning
Tony Antoniou wrote: But for the sake of common practice for the protection of sensitive electronics, keeping something grounded is a good thing to do. I can Keeping the negative terminal of a battery connected while the positive is disconnected doesn't afford any grounding protection. That protection comes from the large mass of metal of the vehicle's body. Once your sensitive equipment is disconnected from the vehicle body it becomes vulnerable to static discharges etc. As soon as one battery terminal is disconnected the circuit is open and no current will flow. The only difference between having positive or negative disconnected is the potential relative to the car of the unconnected terminal, and that is of no consequence. you can also face serious consequences when the positive lead is still connected even though the negative lead isn't. I've seen it happen, despite the fact that it shouldn't, theoretically. What have you seen happen? What are these serious consequences? Besides, if you know what you're doing, you're careful with your spanners. I must be 3#-) Agreed. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: DC surges, a warning
Guy Churchill wrote: I have seen a Leatherman (one of those multi tool things) spot weld itself to the body of a car as the person cut through a wire and happened to have the handle part touching another piece of metal. This was with the +ve connected and the -ve disconnected. (made the person jump quite quickly too grin) The current that caused the Leatherman to spot weld didn't come from the battery, because it was disconnected. It most likely came from a stiffening cap or somesuch in the supply leads to an amp, and any combination of battery connections wouldn't have prevented it. -cb -Who's starting to wonder whether maybe you can draw a large current from one terminal of a battery. Certainly would require some upgrading of all the single pole switches in our cars! - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: DC surges, a warning
Tony Antoniou wrote: Take a look at your deck's installation instructions. Every single brand that I've read from has explicitly noted that the ground lead should be connected first prior to doing any other connections. This is an entirely different situation. When fitting a deck, you want to commonise the car body with the deck body before there is any chance of current flowing through any of the other wires. For example, if you connected the illumination wire first, and that somehow became live (some idiot switches on the car lights), then connected the memory backup wire, the memory circuitry would have almost 12V across it in the reverse polarity, due to the illumination bulbs conducting positive 12V to the ground side of the deck. The original discussion was regarding connecting the battery to the car, where accidental shorts are the only consideration when deciding which order to connect the terminals. -cb - about to give up on this absolutely futile and mostly off-topic argument - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: [Kenwood vs. Sony car audio]
Tony Antoniou wrote: The Sony units do exactly the same thing, fade in and out when muting. Also, when starting the vehicle, it also fades in then so as to avoid any nasty Not all Sony units do this. My MDX-C670 doesn't, for one. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: DC surges, a warning
Tony Antoniou wrote: That's why you disconnect the positive lead first, and reconnect it last. There's a very compelling reason to disconnect the NEGATIVE lead first and reconnect it last, and that's the fact that if the spanner you're using to loosen the terminal happens to touch any grounded metal in the vicinity, it will not short-circuit the battery. If a spanner touches the positive terminal and the vehicle body while the negative terminal is still connected, there will be a big burn up that will not be pleasant. Electrically (ie. from the perspective of any devices connected to the vehicle's electrical system) there is no difference whatsoever which terminal is disconnected first, so the negative or ground terminal is the one to remove first for the above reason. With regards to back-EMFs from relay coils, there have been many accidental omissions of the diode by manufacturers over the years. In some cases this can fry very expensive ECUs under normal operating conditions, and has been the topic of several service bulletins. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: RF Modulators
Kade Hansson wrote: Argh. PLL locked. ATM machine. PIN number. :-) Nope. PLL locked means locked by a PLL, ie. 'P'hase 'L'ocked 'L'oop locked. The two occurences of the word "locked" are referring to different things. The first "locked" refers to the phase of the synthesised frequency (a description of the operation of the circuit element), the second to the magnitude of the frequency. -cb -nitpicking... - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Pure marketing hype from Sony
Magic wrote: I had my hearing tested at a centre that specialises in auditory testing after I claimed to be able to hear things many others couldn't. Bearing in mind most of the doctors at his centre had more letters after their name that you could fit on the average MD label, and the equipment they were using was highly specilised, I doubt they would concurr with your assessment they were using a cheap function generator. You didn't make it clear in your previous post that it was actually the auditory testing centre that tested your ability to differentiate between waveforms at 14KHz. I don't doubt that their equipment is both capable of this level of performance and of uncompromising quality. This does imply that you can sense 28KHz components in the sound, which is a rather super-human ability. Have you ever been in the presence of an old ultrasonic remote control and been annoyed by it? Can you hear the squeal from ultrasonic proximity detectors? Those woofer stopper things that emit ultrasonic noise to quieten noisy dogs must drive you mad too! -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Pure marketing hype from Sony
Magic wrote: Well I can definately hear the difference between a triangle, square and sine wave at 14kHz, and I'm no fruit bat! I do have quite acute hearing though, as I can hear frequencies up to 25kHz, which is quite unusual - certainly surprised the person testing my hearing anyway! The difference between a sine wave and a square or triangle wave is the absence of harmonics in the sine wave. For a fundamental frequency of 14KHz, the first harmonic present in a square or triangle wave will be one octave higher, or 28KHz. Even your somewhat un-human hearing wouldn't hear that first harmonic or any subsequent higher order ones, and so could not discern the difference between these wave forms. I believe that any differences you hear are either artifacts produced by your function generator, in which case you should throw it in the bin, or differences in the signal levels that you are perceiving as a change of timbre. In the case of an audio reproduction system that faithfully records up to 20KHz, any fundamental frequencies of above 10KHz will be reproduced as sine waves, regardless of their original harmonic content and resultant wave forms. Note that this is almost equally true for analog and digital systems, except that analog systems usually have a much shallower roll-off above their frequency cut-off point. So what is the consequence of this? Anyone who writes for "What Hifi" magazine will immediately hear the difference between a 44.1KHz sampling rate and a 96KHz sampling rate, because their favourite 18KHz square wave sound will still be somewhat square when it is reproduced. Us mortals however that failed to respond to the 36KHz harmonic due to our colour-blindness will be somewhat dazzled by the "What Hifi" scribe and his uncanny ability to hear the difference after a quick non-colour-blind visual check of the source. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: OT: Linux
Stainless Steel Rat wrote: Caldera's OpenLinux distribution is the easiest to install by far. Red Hat follows closely behind. So which is it? Easiest by far, or closely followed? -cb - contemplating giving Red Hat a partition or two again. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Re[2]: Streaming audio?
maven wrote: well... the trick isn't to use assembler, rather plain c or something like that. it would rather hard to maintain a prog as complex as a browser written in assembly. would not fit in with their multi-platform philosophy, either... I didn't say write it entirely in assembler - you're right, that would be very hard to do. A main procedure written in the high level language of choice that calls lots of machine code subs is the best way (IMO) to write efficient apps. Compiled C doesn't have a hope of running as fast or in as little memory as the same task written in assembler. As for cross platform compatibility, you do have to sacrifice that for the ultimate in efficiency. I think the Netscape project was based on x86 architecture (what else is there, after all??). -cb - posting seriously off-topic crap now, and hereby apologising - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Streaming audio?
J. Coon wrote: Sometimes I think the software vendors and Microsoft have cut deals on the side with the hardware and memory manufacturers. No, it's just that they've forgotten how to write efficient code in this age of cheap and very powerful hardware. I believe Netscape are working on a browser that can be distributed on one floppy disk that has all the functionality but is much faster than the current Navigator. Trick is to use lots of assembler and don't use libraries that have heaps of redundant code. Remember when we used to be able to run useful programs within the 5KBs of a VIC-20, or the 32KBs of a ZX Spectrum? Hopefully, those days and the programming philosophy that went with them are coming back! -cb PS. If you're prepared to spend the time learning how to get Linux up and running, you can stream audio using the RealAudio server that is included free with a lot of the current distributions. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Copy-Proof CDs
Kenton A. Hoover wrote: It has to do with what you mean by playing "correctly". Introduction of single bit errors will likely not to even be detectable to the human ear. Exactly. So a digital copy made from a S/PDIF data stream will have the same 'undetectable to the human ear' error. However, the logical place to insert such errors is on "block" boundries. Remember that CD-ROM ripping requires that you read the data off the disk in blocks, but the data wasn't written in blocks, so you have to guess how to turn the blocks into a single stream of bits. As I said in my previous post, CD-DA ripping could be stopped by this technique, but preventing a CD deck from outputting S/PDIF digital data? I don't think so somehow! My point is (or was) that ripping is an inexact procedure that could easily be foiled by the insertion of deliberate CRC errors, but it certainly is not the only way to copy the digital audio data on CDs. In my opinion if it can be played, it can be copied. The uncopyable CD will not succeed. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MP3 question with Cool Edit
J. Coon wrote: I recorded some material on my SOny R30 and made an MP3 file using CoolEdit96. The files that it makes are compresses, but have a WAV suffix. Does anyone know if these are different than a file that has an MP3 suffix? Yes they are different, but the difference is only in the header information - the actual compressed audio data is the same. I somehow created a file like the ones you have (just using Windows Sound Recorder I think) with the .wav extension, renamed it to .mp3 and it played perfectly in Winamp. I think that's only because Winamp can handle many different file formats (including Windows .wav) and doesn't spit the dummy if the filename extension doesn't match the file format. Renaming a 'real' MP3 to .wav doesn't make it play in Sound Recorder (a very dumb MS applet). -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Copy-Proof CDs
Kenton A. Hoover wrote: That would require a firmware change to the CD-ROM drive. Their technique is quite clever -- they're inserting CRC errors deliberately, which the CD-ROM units will fix when the data is copied, rendering the copy inaccurate and unusable. If they introduce CRC errors, then any unit that is meant to make corrections based on these CRCs will produce incorrect data. This includes hifi CD players, which will pass incorrect information to their DACs. As far as I can see, there is no way to cause a CD player to play audio without passing the exact data that its DAC is converting to its digital output. Also, A CD-ROM drive playing CD-DA is performing exactly the same reading/error correction etc. as a CD player is, so it would have to decide that a data disc had been inserted in order to be tricked into not playing. If a disc is flagged as data, then most CD players will not play it at all. How can CRCs be manipulated to make a CD-ROM drive think it is reading a data disc, but a CD player still play it correctly as audio? I don't think it is possible. It might be possible to stop a CD-ROM ripping from a CD-DA disc, but simply playing it? Nope. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: recovering deleted tracks
David W. Tamkin wrote: However, not all MD recorders fit that definition of "basic," and on most Sony decks [the JE320, JE500, and JE510 being notable exceptions] one can recover a deleted track even after the TOC has been updated to save the deletion. But all these decks still require entering test mode (with the possible exception of the JE700) to recover deleted tracks. This is beyond the scope of normal usage, so by that definition the JE320, 500, and 510 are also capable of recovering deleted material, but require the extra step of disassembly and manual operation of the loading mechanism. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: 8 cm CD-Rs
PrinceGaz wrote: If you have access to a workshop with a sander and are careful you may be able to sand down the standard 5 1/4" blanks down to a consistent 8cm dia. You might have been joking Gaz, but I have actually made a ninja star shaped CD using tin snips that still played perfectly! Only trouble was getting it in balance again - required a bit of trimming. I ensured that three spots on the CD were still the full radius so that it would locate in the tray of my CD player. It was a demo disc of some classical music collection that came in the mail and it only went for about 10 minutes. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: decibel scale (was analog follow-up question)
Ralf Kuchenhart wrote: As a rule of thumb, 10dB is very close to an average person's perception of doubled volume. Only a rule of thumb? Have a look onto the "sone" scale and it's formular (I don't have it at hand) when converting between sone and dB. A sound of 2 sone is exactly twice as loud as a sound of 1 sone (at least for an average person...). That's why it's only a rule of thumb. The sensitivity of our ears changes quite dramatically across the frequency range, and the rate of change of perceived volume with power also changes with frequency and absolute sound pressure level. There is no specific number of decibels that equates to doubling volume, unless a specific frequency, absolute SPL, and subject are given. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: decibel scale (was analog follow-up question)
David W. Tamkin wrote: The rodent wrote, | More directly useful to | you, doubling volume (energy) is 10dB, so a 20dB sound is twice as loud as | a 10dB sound, and a 110dB sound is twice as loud as a 100dB sound. That doesn't sound right. Speaking in the purely subjective terms of perceived volume, it is generally observed that approximately 9 times the power equates to double the volume. It definitely is NOT right to factor perceived volume linearly with energy. As to doubling the volume, that's subjective, isn't it? "Twice as loud" is a lot like "twice as dark" or "twice as happy." As a rule of thumb, 10dB is very close to an average person's perception of doubled volume. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Ananlog Follow-Up Question
PrinceGaz wrote: PrinceGaz -- "The dicks (sic) with no diggy transfer was one of my increasingly worryingly common, delibrate misspellings. Maybe I do need therapy..." And was this one?? ^ -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: no new SCMS standard
Stainless Steel Rat wrote: The gist of it is that backups are made and stored somewhere safe in case the original fails, or is lost or stolen, or whatever. The MD you make from an audio CD and carry around, leaving the audio CD at home, is not a backup. Funny that. I've seen many a software package distributed on floppy disks that instructs the end user to make a backup copy, and then use the backup copy and store the original in a safe place. By the legal definition, that backup could actually be illegal, given that it is used while the original is still in a usable condition and in the original owner's possession. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Analog Recording Questions
PrinceGaz wrote: I assume this is the guy who can detect differences in sound which even the highest quality measurement instruments cannot-- and hear nuances in the playback of 40Khz tones and defects in 16, 20 and even 24bit ADC storage. No, he can hear the difference between Sony and Sharp ATRACs, a very easily measurable and quantifiable difference. Actually, there's probably more difference there than between a line-out and a headphone out, but Sony still sees fit to separate them. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: no new SCMS standard
The portion of the ruling most relevant to the case is that I cannot give you a copy of the program on diskette unless I also give you my original, regardless that you also have a copy of the original. You know what I really hate? When I make backups of my favourite CDs on minidiscs, and then accidentally lose those backups in my friends homes. I then have to make more backups and then they got stolen when I leave them sitting around. And what do I hate about this? I don't know who should be prosecuted for what. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD - MP3
Rob asked: Can it make an MP3 from a line-in source? Thanks! Yes, but the line-in must be recorded as a PCM wav file first. BTW, CDCopy will produce MP3s with any standard bitrate from 32kb/s to 320kb/s, and allows the choice of several different coders. It can also normalise, convert bitrates of existing MP3s and create channel dependent or independent, or even mono MP3s. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sharp 702
Stainless Steel Rat wrote: Sharp ATRAC 5.0, which is comparable to Sony's ATRAC 4.0. In my experience, no Sharp ATRAC is comparable to Sony 4 or better. I have never heard artifacts from my JE510 using Sony ATRAC 4, but both an MS200 and 722 (Sharp 5 and 6 respectively) belonging to friends have produced audible artifacts on the same material. My bat-eared cousin hears a sparkling noise with Sharp ATRAC that is absent with Sony 4, but also concedes that the Sharp has more accurate top end response. His opinion is that Sharp ATRAC is better despite the sparkling noise, because he appreciates the part of the audible spectrum that us full-humans don't hear! Point is, comparing Sharp and Sony ATRACs is like comparing apples and oranges. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: I square I saw a sine of all this
PrinceGaz wrote: Apologies for the very bad joke attempt in the "subject" field. Mmm... What if a 22.05KHz sine wave is recorded such that the 44.1KHz sampling points fall exactly (or close to) where the waveform is near zero. A 22.05KHz waveform can't be recorded because it is not less than half the sampling rate. In thoery, any frequency under this can be digitised accurately but in practise some leeway is allowed to compensate for our not mathematically perfect hardware. Using 44.1KHz sampling, the practical and implemented limit is 20KHz. Won't it just sample zero or next to zero every time, such that regardless of sampling methods or filtering, the end result will be a zero (or near zero) output? Yes, but that won't happen for frequencies below or above 22.05KHz. For the ones above, they will alias to frequencies the same amount below at the D-A stage, which is why it is so important to remove these frequencies before the signal is digitised. Is a wider bit-width employed and/or interpolation used to make it easier on the following analog filters? A wider bit width isn't used for oversampling, that is left to schemes like SBM, etc. Interpolation is used to generate more samples in the digital domain, and the D-A is operated at a multiple of the actual sampling rate to accomodate the interpolated samples. It is done entirely to ease the task of the analog filters. Very steep slope filters introduce significant phase errors which are undesirable. By oversampling, we gain several octaves to apply gentle slope and more phase correct filtering. The interpolation is performed by DSPs and will accurately plot a sine wave at any frequency below half the sampling rate - there is no need to record these samples on the meda. For more in depth information about how this is achieved, do a search for "Nyquist theory" on the web. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Longer play through pitch control / R3 test mode
David W. Tamkin wrote: In reply to this from someone I don't know: B Err, David-- we both own MZ-R3 portables 3+ years old. Do you B really think an ATRAC chip running at 4x the speed of the one in our B R3's would be difficult to make. Okay they may now use ATRAC 4.5 or You're dealing in conditionals, Gareth, while Gary and I were dealing in in- dicatives. Whether such a chip is already present in units that are on the market now, whether such a chip exists now, whether such a chip can be pro- The point is that the manufacturers are only going to make the chips just fast enough to do the job at hand. Why go to the extra expense of producing a DSP that has 4 times the required performance? Ahh, you say, so that pitch control can be made to play at faster speeds. My view is that that's a lot of expense to implement what is essentially a novelty feature. If PC processors are any kind of indication a doubling of performance demands over 10 times the cost, so to implement 300% (4x) speed increase ability would push the DSP cost to over 100 times what it currently is. -cb - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
