Whatever works for you,- in the end you'll figure out a way of getting satisfying sound from 44.1/16 bit material, it's not going to run away in the meantime ...
16/24/ even 32 ?? The digital /analog interface and especially the final analog
(amp/speakers) are 90% of the listening experience.
Actually heard a cassette deck through my system today. Besides the noise ,
it really sounded good..
PS - I do prefer CD/digital here in the VERY quiet country. Noise is easily heard
in the silence of the smokies ( tree frogs are the loudest thing here
)OS
I just had a weird idea. Could you use a low-noise ADC to monitor the output of the DAC and remove noise in the audio band? Could this be a feasible way to lower the noise floor and increase the effective bits of a DAC?
Also, what if they made audio DACs output say +-10V instead of +-2V or whatever it is? Could the output level be increased to bring more stuff out of the noise floor or would the changes necessarily increase the noise as well?
Also, what if they made audio DACs output say +-10V instead of +-2V or whatever it is? Could the output level be increased to bring more stuff out of the noise floor or would the changes necessarily increase the noise as well?
Monitor the noise floor - I can't hear my "noise floor" ??
For " mine is longer" technical arguments - good. If I can not hear anything
with my ear to the tweeter at full volume , I'm a happy camper (even at 16 bit).
Edit - then it comes down to the actual recording - 90's alan parsons flac's are
the quietest of all my digital. (ear to tweeter)
OS
Last edited:
I suggested this under the Hi-End Standards banner.... HiEnd can change their standards and get the level up and further away from the noise floor. Just an idea for others. With IC running on 3 v power and 1.8v, it makes it harder to be low noise and high dynamic range and low distortion. Might get a more extended level range of linear operation. Depends on this or that.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
That would only work if the noise that comes out is produced predominantly by the stuff AFTER the DAC, like filters, buffers etc. The noise from the DAC itself would increase in the same ratio as you increase the output level.
I believe (but have no proof) that the DAC noise is the limiting factor and that this ploy would therefore not work
Jan
Actually, I have 16/44.1 music downloads as well and play them same way via file. They dont sound as open and clear. I have to assume they were remarstered to RedBook with new sota gear before HD Tracks gets them. Or its old 16/44 files that are not as good as 16/44.1 could be done now. I'd have to ask them. They actually sound similar to playing a CD.
I have to get my beauty sleep now -
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I've cleaned up some posts and Steve Eddy (correct spelling this time) is in read only mode for a week for ignoring a moderator directive /disrespectful behavior.
As ostripper points out, there is no CD noise problem. However, a particular system may have problems with noise floor while playing back CDs - there is a difference!
It seems very hard for some people to accept that their system may be at fault somewhere - a bit of the 'blame the messenger' thing, perhaps,
...
HD - what ? they take a bog standard stereo source and add "fake" multichannel
info to it.
We could assume it sounds better ?
I have a DSP that will do the same thing to ANY 16bit/44K.
Some of my better ripped blu- ray soundtracks already have that multichannel
info native AC3 , but they were made this way.
PS - the remastered alan parsons had to be manipulated (I have the original 16/44) ..
(for that killer low noise floor)
OS
info to it.
We could assume it sounds better ?
I have a DSP that will do the same thing to ANY 16bit/44K.
Some of my better ripped blu- ray soundtracks already have that multichannel
info native AC3 , but they were made this way.
PS - the remastered alan parsons had to be manipulated (I have the original 16/44) ..
(for that killer low noise floor)
OS
At the end, with all the measuring instruments you have, and because only the results matters, why don't you make distortion measurements to compare the two sandard's reproduction quality on your system ?
... while i pretend it is the 96KHz, mostly ;-)
Last edited:
It depends on a number of factors, the most important being the design of the D/A converter. 200 nS is certainly a problem. 20 nS is about as good as you can get (or I was able to) in a real system and even that will produce artifacts from some D/A converters.
Someone here, diss'd the issue 50 Hz and 3,000 Hz at -80 dB being a real issue, but these types of non-musical distortion can result from jitter.
Now one of the nastier versions of jitter is where there is something causing it that has it's own clock frequency. Random jitter is not quite as bad.
ES
At what point? The DAC clock (the only place it actually counts)? That seems... remarkable.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.