Digital, but not by the numbers - Page 16 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Line Level

Digital Line Level DACs, Digital Crossovers, Equalizers, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 30th November 2012, 03:40 PM   #151
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
One pointless post an absurd thread doth not make. Please keep this on-topic Julf - cross examination of Charles on aspects of sigma-delta theory most certainly is OT. Start another thread if you really want to engage in a willy-wanging contest.
but I thought it was R2R?



though it could of course be some unknown industrial R2R 16bit dac... I suppose? hard to tell with so little detail
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2012, 03:44 PM   #152
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
marce, dont worry about it, I think abrax is maybe one of the few that isnt clear on the obvious insider knowledge of this area, or was simply dangling a carrot =)
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2012, 03:44 PM   #153
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 96
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
What was R2R? Charles thinks his DAC's R2R but he's mistaken on that because Philips use a neat little trick called 'Continuous Calibration' to set the weights of individual current sources. This isn't compatible with a resistor-based ladder architecture.

The industrial ladder DAC isn't unknown any more, though I think Cees still scratches off the markings. Its voltage out, and Charles' is current-out, as is mine.
__________________
It doesn't have to take the form of a conspiracy, rather a consensus... James H Kunstler

Last edited by abraxalito; 30th November 2012 at 03:54 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2012, 03:46 PM   #154
Charles is offline Charles  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Germany
There is no oversampling taking place in the Tera-Player.

Every digital volume control decreases volume by calculation and the lower the volume, the fewer the bits that contain the remaining signal. Full resolution is obtained at full volume.

The digital volume control in the Tera-Player works and sounds very good, else I would have chosen different means for volume control.

It is not my fault that sigma-delta DACs don't sound good, I would be happy if they would. They may be considered a good idea that just turned out bad. And now a whole industry with bad ears is creating stuff for people with bad ears. Please take this as my very subjective experience of the matter.

IMO, when quoting the true resolution of a sigma-delta DAC, always the resolution of the output stage should be quoted, ie. 1 bit, 2 bit or maybe up to 6 bit in case of the ESS Sabre DAC (which are damn many bits for a sigma-delta DAC).

Speaking of 24-bits or even 32-bits with sigma-delta DACs some other term should be used, here are some suggestions: Noise-o-lution, Fake-o-lution, Dream-o-lution, Mareting-o-lution, Non-Timbre-o-lution, Headache-o-lution, Digititis-o-lution, Artific-o-lution, not-suited-for-music-o-lution ... something like that ...

Charles
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2012, 03:57 PM   #155
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
You really are getting the hang of those strawmen now Not my meaning, what I meant was :

Do you know how delta-sigma actually works? Have you ever heard of pulse density modulation?

That's willy-wanging.

Clearer now?
Not really. If you look at the latest posting by Charles, the one that states "IMO, when quoting the true resolution of a sigma-delta DAC, always the resolution of the output stage should be quoted, ie. 1 bit, 2 bit or maybe up to 6 bit in case of the ESS Sabre DAC (which are damn many bits for a sigma-delta DAC)", do you still think my (serious) question is not justified?
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2012, 04:01 PM   #156
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles View Post
Every digital volume control decreases volume by calculation and the lower the volume, the fewer the bits that contain the remaining signal. Full resolution is obtained at full volume.
And what is the full resolution of the volume control in the Tera-Player?

Quote:
IMO, when quoting the true resolution of a sigma-delta DAC, always the resolution of the output stage should be quoted, ie. 1 bit, 2 bit or maybe up to 6 bit in case of the ESS Sabre DAC (which are damn many bits for a sigma-delta DAC).
But do you agree that independent of the output stage of a delta-sigma DAC being 1, 2, 6 or 27 bits, even a 1-bit delta-sgma DAC can achieve a resolution that is more than 16 bits (resolution here defined as "with an ability to resolve amplitude differences smaller than 1/2^16 of full scale)?
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2012, 04:06 PM   #157
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 96
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julf View Post
Not really.
Yes, really.

Quote:
If you look at the latest posting by Charles, the one that states "IMO, when quoting the true resolution of a sigma-delta DAC, always the resolution of the output stage should be quoted, ie. 1 bit, 2 bit or maybe up to 6 bit in case of the ESS Sabre DAC (which are damn many bits for a sigma-delta DAC)", do you still think my (serious) question is not justified?
Irrelevant. If you want to explain something to Charles that he's misunderstood, that wouldn't be OT. But willy-wanging remains willy-wanging.
__________________
It doesn't have to take the form of a conspiracy, rather a consensus... James H Kunstler
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2012, 04:10 PM   #158
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
What was R2R? Charles thinks his DAC's R2R but he's mistaken on that because Philips use a neat little trick called 'Continuous Calibration' to set the weights of individual current sources. This isn't compatible with a resistor-based ladder architecture.

The industrial ladder DAC isn't unknown any more, though I think Cees still scratches off the markings. Its voltage out, and Charles' is current-out, as is mine.
hey you need to learn to recognize my facetious comments, sorry forgot the smiley
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2012, 04:11 PM   #159
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 96
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Ah ok, thanks for the clarification
__________________
It doesn't have to take the form of a conspiracy, rather a consensus... James H Kunstler
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2012, 04:30 PM   #160
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
Yes, really.
No, not really.

Quote:
Irrelevant.
Irrelevant, according to you.

Quote:
If you want to explain something to Charles that he's misunderstood, that wouldn't be OT. But willy-wanging remains willy-wanging.
It is willy-wanging if you say it is willy-wanging. But I feel it is totally valid and called for to ask, in all seriousness, based on his statements, if Charles actually understands how delta-sigma and pulse-density modulation works.

You might disagree, but this is a public forum. If you have to resort to pejorative terms like "willy-wanging", that is your choice.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tubes Numbers kmscouts Tubes / Valves 3 30th September 2012 04:19 AM
Confused by the numbers alexmoose Tubes / Valves 52 7th August 2006 03:06 AM
Still can't get reasonable numbers mashaffer Multi-Way 13 10th July 2006 04:55 PM
Where did these EL84 numbers come from? Sherman Tubes / Valves 2 13th June 2005 06:53 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:41 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2