What Pavel said ... 
DO NOT USE Express Rip !!! Normally I always use EAC, but I was forced to go to an alternate laptop over some weeks now, and was getting by with the software loaded on it. Which included Express Rip, and no EAC ...
So, just corrected that situation by grabbing EAC, and the newly ripped waveform looks totally different, and correct. So, will begin Take 2 ....
DO NOT USE Express Rip !!! Normally I always use EAC, but I was forced to go to an alternate laptop over some weeks now, and was getting by with the software loaded on it. Which included Express Rip, and no EAC ...
So, just corrected that situation by grabbing EAC, and the newly ripped waveform looks totally different, and correct. So, will begin Take 2 ...
.
Richard,
Just as you are talking about all the required dynamic range to hear from softest sound to loudest acceptable level this also goes to the need to have high resolution speakers. I have built some systems in the past that could do this, 25hz on the low end and over 20Khz on the top end with extreme resolution. This required the use of two different compression drivers, one above the other, two Be diaphragms in TAD drivers. One driver covered the 1.6Khz and up range to 10Khz and a second ET703 driver that went from 10Khz and up. The first resonance in the upper driver is approximately 45Khz and with this driver combination you could hear things in the upper range that no other system I have ever heard could do. You could for the first time hear the difference between a cymbal splash and the fact you were hearing someone hitting a very small triangle, it was clear as day what you were hearing, I had heard the track many times before and this was like a light just went on, resolution of the extreme high end that was unbelievable. So all this talk about getting the digital side correct really does require an extreme speaker system to be able to present that high resolution digital information to our ears. The cost today of those drivers would be in the neighborhood of almost 10K $ just for those two drivers in a stereo pair.
Just as you are talking about all the required dynamic range to hear from softest sound to loudest acceptable level this also goes to the need to have high resolution speakers. I have built some systems in the past that could do this, 25hz on the low end and over 20Khz on the top end with extreme resolution. This required the use of two different compression drivers, one above the other, two Be diaphragms in TAD drivers. One driver covered the 1.6Khz and up range to 10Khz and a second ET703 driver that went from 10Khz and up. The first resonance in the upper driver is approximately 45Khz and with this driver combination you could hear things in the upper range that no other system I have ever heard could do. You could for the first time hear the difference between a cymbal splash and the fact you were hearing someone hitting a very small triangle, it was clear as day what you were hearing, I had heard the track many times before and this was like a light just went on, resolution of the extreme high end that was unbelievable. So all this talk about getting the digital side correct really does require an extreme speaker system to be able to present that high resolution digital information to our ears. The cost today of those drivers would be in the neighborhood of almost 10K $ just for those two drivers in a stereo pair.
... we give it another go - https://www.dropbox.com/s/h6xnfen4ic52s8f/Californ-Take2.wav?dl=0.Have downloaded this myself, and it is right this time. Note that the expanded segments are much quieter, because the average level is way down - yet the peak value is only down a few dB from max.
Oh dear,
... having difficulty here is definitely bad audio karma ... .Fortunately, that "extreme speaker system" is not required - I haven't used one in 30 years, and hearing that sort of thing has not been a problem ...
Many musicians loose their hearing on one side and they don't even have to be in the orch!
The flute and piccolo players I met from the Arts program knew they were doing this (even way back then, 25 y) and ... went ahead.
Strange, in other disciplines you don't have to ... sacrifice!
[Not to mention the repetitive stress injuries ...]
My wife, for one. Impaired hearing on the right side, since she sat at stage left.
I agree Frank, they played the BSO from 15 ips master tape over the air (playback supervised by the recording engineer) yes FM radio at 70dB SNR and you could hear people rubbing up against their seats at quiet parts. Scary detail from everything.
A nice recounting of Bernie Gordon's IC's will never beat discrete saga. JC was not alone.
Planet Analog - Doug Grant - The Elusive 12-Bit D/A Converter
Planet Analog - Doug Grant - The Elusive 12-Bit D/A Converter
Frank,
If you are using any type of normal soft dome or even many hard domes on the very high frequencies it isn't going to happen with any type of resolution, not if you understand the way they all break up at the upper limits. And you surely can't do that with a cone driver, so I would imagine what I am saying you have never experienced. Not that they won't make some noise at very high frequencies but I have never seem any other type of device that can cleanly work at the extreme high frequencies. It is usually noise you are hearing or very rough FR at the upper limits and most devices have trouble getting over 16Khz before some serious breakup modes in the device. Sorry but you wouldn't know what I am talking about if you didn't hear it. And I will add that almost all normal compression drivers have the same problems, the majority have problems getting over 16Khz, they just have to much mass and the typical aluminum diaphragms have upper resonances in the audible range. Believe me even with EQ you have problems in the very upper ranges of human hearing. It would be like telling the difference of someone scrapping their nails on a chalk board and being able to tell if it was a black board or green board!
If you are using any type of normal soft dome or even many hard domes on the very high frequencies it isn't going to happen with any type of resolution, not if you understand the way they all break up at the upper limits. And you surely can't do that with a cone driver, so I would imagine what I am saying you have never experienced. Not that they won't make some noise at very high frequencies but I have never seem any other type of device that can cleanly work at the extreme high frequencies. It is usually noise you are hearing or very rough FR at the upper limits and most devices have trouble getting over 16Khz before some serious breakup modes in the device. Sorry but you wouldn't know what I am talking about if you didn't hear it. And I will add that almost all normal compression drivers have the same problems, the majority have problems getting over 16Khz, they just have to much mass and the typical aluminum diaphragms have upper resonances in the audible range. Believe me even with EQ you have problems in the very upper ranges of human hearing. It would be like telling the difference of someone scrapping their nails on a chalk board and being able to tell if it was a black board or green board!
Well lets run those numbers you seem to not like. You have said your listening levels are lower than concert levels. The first issue is according to Fletcher & Munson that changes the timbre. Turns out that is actually not a big issue for most folks according to some of the brain researchers.
Next we can look at the noise floor. Lets take NC40 for a daytime home environment allow closed earphones and reduce that to NC10. Now if you listen at 75 dB then you only require a signal to noise ration of 65 db. Allowing for the ability to pick out signals below the noise of 30 dB. You get the requirement of 95 dB. A 16 bit recording can give you 99 dB. So no surprises that 16 bits of playback works for you.
Now we look at Dick M.'s place. It is a few miles from nowhere, enclosed by earthquake rated walls. So outside noise is pretty much not an issue. I know what my listening space is but let us allow a bit more noise for his. Try NC20. Now he has described his system as a bit of a lion. (I would have used tiger, but jn would get confused.) So lets figure he peaks at a modest 102 dB. Although the gear he has mentioned probably can do 110 or more.
So we would need a range of 82 dB minimum and allowing for 30 dB of critical band signal recovery from noise that would require 18 bits. Even if he has a 20 dB hearing loss!
Now of course in recording you can't adjust the gain ahead of real time so you need some more bits for clipping margin.
As to your claim you hear nothing, that seems perfectly in line with the predictions and quite believable.
ES
How do we get the fullest use of the 24bit converters? Accepting 18-20 bits as OK and dithering it --- this is Not the best we can do any more. We have 4-6 bits not being used to reproducing music.... buried in noise.
I think better designs are needed to use all the 24 bits (+/- 1) in playback. Those 4-6 bits will help to lower distortion significantly (IMO).
What are the benefits of the other converter topologies, which could get used for more usable bits in the most important mid levels?
THx-RNMarsh
I think better designs are needed to use all the 24 bits (+/- 1) in playback. Those 4-6 bits will help to lower distortion significantly (IMO).
What are the benefits of the other converter topologies, which could get used for more usable bits in the most important mid levels?
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Well first you need a microphone with the required dynamic range. They don't exist.
Then you need an ADC that actually has 24 bits resolution. They dont exist
Then you need a DAC that actually has 24 bits resolution. They don't exist
The analog electronics is available around the performance you need.
And finally you need a record company who gives a ***t about the 3 people who want this sort of dynamic range and have the ability to reproduce it.
Or you can accept that what we have can be actually pretty damned good if the recording engineer is allowed to do his job.
Take the bottom 6 bits, put them into a 6 bit D/A, and add them to the signal scaled appropriately.
Better than flipping a coin with dither..
jn
ps..all this goop for a half an LSB..sheesh
Or some of these converter technologies applied for best performance at mid level record/playback? [It isnt about noise floor, exactly - its about more bits at the levels where we listen.]
Relate ADC Topologies And Performance To Applications | Analog content from Electronic Design
TH-RNMarsh
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.