Daverz wrote:
> I'll definitely put this on my wish list if it
>
> * Runs cool (or at least cooler than my Bryston).
> * Can do the first-order (6 dB/octave) high-pass filter that my
> Vandersteen speakers need. (Yeah, I've done this with sox on the
> server, but I'd rather not have the filter
I'll definitely put this on my wish list if it
* Runs cool (or at least cooler than my Bryston).
* Can do the first-order (6 dB/octave) high-pass filter that my
Vandersteen speakers need. (Yeah, I've done this with sox on the
server, but I'd rather not have the filter at the source.)
-
prutten wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I just stumbled across this thread today and noted it had gotten quite
> detailed on the technical issues of digitization (which is rather
> applies to all digital amplification), and wanted to rather respond to
> the OP's question on the NAD c390dd. I have listened
nicholasg wrote:
> I'm curious as this is a "digital" amp.
>
> According to the NAD website "C 390DD has no analogue stages in the
> signal path, keeping music in the digital domain right up to the speaker
> outputs. All preamp functions are executed in the digital domain without
> the phase shi
Phil Leigh wrote:
> > darrenyeats wrote:
> >
> > I was thinking of these (figure 5 in each case):
> > http://www.stereophile.com/content/b...r-measurements
> > http://www.stereophile.com/content/s...r-measurements> >
> ... It's not clear to what Stereophile think these measurements prove
> in
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
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 upsamp
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 i
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
--
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
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
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
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 3.3/
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 intelligently.
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,
> thi
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 introductio
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 g
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)
-
Phil Leigh;695205 Wrote:
> Dither is only (these days) relevant when downsampling from 24 to 16
> bits. It determines what happens in what I call the lowest half-bit. It
> pseudo-randomises it, which helps avoid quantisation distortion becoming
> apparent on very quite things like in fade outs, r
darrenyeats;695191 Wrote:
> What I said about dither is correct AFAIK.
>
> The "bottom half bit", as you put it, is present in every sample
> whether the waveform is big or small. So if I am right, the jaggedness
> is changed from signal correlated jaggedness to random jaggedness by
> dither. Th
Phil Leigh;695159 Wrote:
> Dithering is entirely optional and affects what happens in the bottom
> half bit (I'm sure we've been over this before?).
>
> Basic electronics 101... What happens when you put a changing DC
> voltage into a capacitor?... Capacitor acts as an integrator... What
> comes
Thanks Phil and everyone, I am a software guy, so I really appreciate
all this awesome hardware/electronics information!
--
Henry66
Henry66's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=38863
View this thread:
darrenyeats;695150 Wrote:
> That makes sense to me. But this seems to go against the idea the
> analogue waveform is re-created as a continuous curve which intersects
> the data points. Instead, it seems the values are just output as a
> voltage during each sample interval.
>
> Even if the above
darrenyeats;695133 Wrote:
> Figure 6 is 24 bit data, but figure 5 is 16 bit. John Atkinson wrote:
> "reproduction of an undithered tone at exactly 90.31dBFS (fig.5)
> was perfect, with excellent waveform symmetry, and clear delineation of
> the three DC voltage levels described by this signa
Mnyb;695135 Wrote:
> Time for another bad analogy ( in good forum tradition ) .
>
> "out of context" is my thought ?
>
> If you walk up to your HD tv some millimeters away with an magnifying
> glass, you see nothing but dots , but you don't get any sleepless
> nights over that in the visual cas
Time for another bad analogy ( in good forum tradition ) .
"out of context" is my thought ?
If you walk up to your HD tv some millimeters away with an magnifying
glass, you see nothing but dots , but you don't get any sleepless
nights over that in the visual case it is accepted that the dots blu
Phil Leigh;695130 Wrote:
> Thanks... If you are referring to figs 5 & 6, they look pretty good to
> me. I note they are 24-bit data, so you can ignore my 1-bit remark!
> The waveforms aren't really "staircases"... They have some HF
> distortion which looks like low level non-linearity to me, but
darrenyeats;695118 Wrote:
> I was thinking of these (figure 5 in each case):
> http://www.stereophile.com/content/benchmark-dac1-usb-da-processor-headphone-amplifier-measurements
> http://www.stereophile.com/content/simaudio-moon-evolution-650d-cd-player-measurements
>
> Though, I imagine the di
Phil Leigh;695115 Wrote:
> Erm... At -90db a 16-bit DAC only has 1 bit to play with... This test
> might say something about DAC linearity but it won't say anything about
> what music sounds like, given the fact that at normal listening levels a
> -90db signal is going to be way way below the lev
darrenyeats;695106 Wrote:
> All that makes sense...but in that case could someone explain the
> staircase output in the Stereophile measurements for many DACs? These
> very often show distinct voltage level steps in an undithered 16 bit
> tone at -90db.
>
> I'm not questioning what has been said
darrenyeats;695106 Wrote:
> All that makes sense...but in that case could someone explain the
> staircase output in the Stereophile measurements for many DACs? These
> very often show distinct voltage level steps in an undithered 16 bit
> tone at -90db.
>
> I'm not questioning what has been said
Mnyb;695104 Wrote:
> An odd french design http://www.devialet.com/ which have claimed
> performance that is extremely good in any amp (but this is not cheap ).
I was able to listen to this amp in a hi-end setup in a store and for a
few hours in my setup at home: WOW! Sounded excitingly neutral/d
Tech data is interesting ! good development to up the performance of
switchmode
--
Mnyb
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium
All that makes sense...but in that case could someone explain the
staircase output in the Stereophile measurements for many DACs? These
very often show distinct voltage level steps in an undithered 16 bit
tone at -90db.
I'm not questioning what has been said, I am genuinely curious and I
would li
It's a switchmode amp how they are modulated is a bit of science
bitstream like high frequency something / pwm like and there is a
filter at the output .
In the simplest for as I understands it switchmode amp is a kind of pwm
(pulse width modulator ) . On and off pulses with a length, the filter
Henry66;695052 Wrote:
> So how does this work? Does the amplifier send "jagged" (digitized)
> waveforms out the speaker terminals, and the speaker coil itself
> effectively does the D-to-A conversion by simply smoothing out the
> jaggies?
*cough*
There are no "jagged waveforms". This is an urban
So how does this work? Does the amplifier send "jagged" (digitized)
waveforms out the speaker terminals, and the speaker coil itself
effectively does the D-to-A conversion?
--
Henry66
Henry66's Profile: http://forums.slimd
I'm curious as this is a "digital" amp.
According to the NAD website "C 390DD has no analogue stages in the
signal path, keeping music in the digital domain right up to the
speaker outputs. All preamp functions are executed in the digital
domain without the phase shift, noise and distortion that
38 matches
Mail list logo
