the 390DD is indeed a very interesting amp. Like a poor mans (i.e. me)
M2
check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jJR-8sv1pM for more info
--
finnbrodersen
Some version of SBServer running on a HP EX490 home server
SBReceiver -- NAD C162+C272 -- DALI IKON 6 (let's call it MidFi)
Update I used with SoX with 2 suggested comandlines
The -v option was in my case not really necessary only 1 out 5 files
complained about clipping and it was at most 16 samples so it should be
used on case by case basis.
Unless you *cough* produce loudness war music but then you won't come
Guys, here is where I was going wrong! I was thinking about that 16 bit
waveform and then I was thinking in 16/44 DAC terms (I was sleep
deprived!) which should smooth it analoguely.
Obviously these DACs are not 16/44. But, I would expect an upsampling
24 bit DAC to smooth 16/44 digitally.
I'm
finnbrodersen;695239 Wrote:
the 390DD is indeed a very interesting amp. Like a poor mans (i.e. me)
M2
check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jJR-8sv1pM for more info
and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sksqoz1KXGQ and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxXIqDsIzgs for an introduction to
darrenyeats;695256 Wrote:
Guys, here is where I was going wrong! I was thinking about that 16 bit
waveform and then I was thinking in 16/44 DAC terms (I was sleep
deprived!) which should smooth it analoguely.
Obviously these DACs are not 16/44. But, even after getting some sleep,
this
Phil,
See this post:
Submitted by Miska on Sun, 02/12/2012 - 17:43
Here: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Why-2496-not-24192
Which shows graphically what I mean. Upsampling should make a big
difference to the smoothness of the waveform - if the data points are
interpolated
Darren,
My head hurts... I think we are in a semantic loop :-)
What EXACTLY do you think that Stereophile fig 5 trace shows you?
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
Touch(wired/W7)+Teddy Pardo PSU - Audiolense
Phil Leigh;695305 Wrote:
Darren,
My head hurts... I think we are in a semantic loop :-)
Yeah, you're probably right.
The confusion comes because you stated there should be no jagged
waveforms in digital audio, something which I agree with I guess. So I
expected to see a smoothed output
sckramer;695217 Wrote:
I'll start uploading a few pics
just start unsoldering 2 larger tabs at the same time torqe the black
plastic housing off with pliers-- the LED will stay on the board-- take
that off next, also you can put this back together (its not destroyed)
Thanks much
darrenyeats;695307 Wrote:
Yeah, you're probably right.
You stated there should be no jagged waveforms in digital audio. And
actually that sounded sensible. So I expected to see a smoothed output
from these Stereophile plots...but I didn't! This was my initial
query.
What didn't help
Phil Leigh;695278 Wrote:
Just to be crystal clear on this, when Stereophile talk about the 3
voltage levels... they ARE talking about the AC voltages:
zero-crossing, peak and trough for a single bit representing the sine
wave. They are NOT talking about anything to do with jagged DC
Stereophile did test the M2
http://www.stereophile.com/content/nad-m2-direct-digital-integrated-amplifier-measurements
You miss something by not reading the hifi rags afterall
It measures almost like a t DAC
Wonder how the 390DD would score ?
--
Mnyb
Archimago;695323 Wrote:
If you feed a 16-bit computer generated -90dB undithered 'sine' wave,
you're essentially feeding into the DAC a 1kHz (in this case) 1-bit
*square* wave. This is exactly what the measurements show.
Despite my doubts and musings yesterday, I don't think so. What is
darrenyeats;695330 Wrote:
Despite my doubts and musings yesterday, I don't think so. What is the
difference between a sine wave and a square wave at -90db in 16 bit?
None. A 16/44 DAC should smooth this analoguely (I think this sinc
function thingy is about this). A 24/96 DAC would upsample
Mnyb;695242 Wrote:
One thing caught my interest here:
http://src.infinitewave.ca/
Many brand name name resamplers don't do a spotless job ??
The pictures are nice to watch but as mentioned before you´ll have a
hard time to find even the worst resamplers tested there to sound wrong
:)
JohnSwenson;694826 Wrote:
Actually I was thinking more about code than data. The assumption being
that a mainloop for processing PCM is probably a lot simpler than the
loop for processing flac, thus giving a higher probability of a cache
miss on the code. I haven't actually analyzed the code
FYI
--
Turn Me Up! turnm...@turnmeup.org
16:54 (4 hours ago)
to Darren
Hello!
It's that time of year again when we apply concerted effort and
focus the world's attention on the state of the Loudness Wars.
We eagerly urge you join with us and help us promote...
===[ Dynamic Range Day - March
Phil Leigh;695347 Wrote:
That miska stuff is bollocks. he's using audacity plots to try to prove
his incorrect point. Audacity has major bugs int the way it renders
waveforms on screen.
If you put a real oscilloscope across a DAC you get to see the truth
and it doesn't look like ANY of his
SoX was not that hard to use , the hard part is to choose settings afaik
as SoX is very flexible and probably can be used with anything but sane
settings if you wan't .
Thank you for suggested settings
Preliminary the results are a null ( as expected ) I will convert some
more files too try
http://turnmeup.org/
find groups in your area!!!
--
TheOctavist
VortexboxSBT(stock)Forssell MDAC-2Klein and Hummell 0300D
Sota Sapphire/Lyra KleosBespoke Valve Phono StageMastersound Due
VentiLink Audio K100
Has anyone had a problem with some wma files playing like they are in
fast forward? The problem is with my touch and not the server since my
squeezeebox radio plays them fine.
--
pongagt
pongagt's Profile:
21 matches
Mail list logo
