The dynamic range of 16 bits - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Source

Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, 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 17th June 2003, 09:58 PM   #21
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Christer, OUCH!
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2003, 10:19 PM   #22
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: As far from the NOSsers as possible
Default How can anyone take Bedini seriously?????

I have an original press release for that log that we received.

It is dated Feb. 31, 1991.

I thought that April Fool's Day had come early that year.

(For those who don't believe me......I think I still have it somewhere. Just don't make me look for it. Take my word this time.)

Jocko
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2003, 10:23 PM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Steve Eddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Default Re: Binary two's complement

Quote:
Originally posted by Fred Dieckmann
From Burr Brown data sheet
Ok, so let's work it out.

Instead of being able to swing a full 6 volts, you can only swing (+2.999908) - (-3.000000) or 5.999908 volts. Maximum quantization noise is still going to be +/-1/2LSB. 1/2LSB here will be 0.000046 volts (0.000092/2) and since we're looking at a peak-to-peak signal swing, peak-to-peak quantization noise will be (+0.000046) - (-0.000046) or 0.000092 volts.

Going back to the triend and true definition of dynamic range as being the ratio of the noise floor to the maximum signal, we get:

20 x log (0.000092/5.999908) = 96.287135dB

If we were able to swing the full 6 volts, we'd get a dynamic range of:

20 x log (0.000092/6) = 96.287268dB

For a difference of 0.000133dB.

Yes?

se
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2003, 10:26 PM   #24
diyAudio Member
 
Steve Eddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Default Re: How can anyone take Bedini seriously?????

Quote:
Originally posted by Jocko Homo
I have an original press release for that log that we received.

It is dated Feb. 31, 1991.

I thought that April Fool's Day had come early that year.

(For those who don't believe me......I think I still have it somewhere. Just don't make me look for it. Take my word this time.)
Hehehe. Remember the RainTinge ad that came out I think in an April issue of Stereophile?

se
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2003, 10:51 PM   #25
diyAudio Retiree
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Spain or the pueblo of Los Angeles
Default 10 will get me 20

The minimum AC signal the DAC can swing is 1 bit positive to 1 bit negative. Anyone who thinks the signal below is a sine wave should be happy to give me a 20 dollar bill in exchange for a ten using the same rational. Any takers? I hope that doesn't leave the least significant twit in a dither....
Attached Images
File Type: jpg sinewave.jpg (3.8 KB, 387 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2003, 11:00 PM   #26
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Could you explain to me the reason why a DAC cannot swing from 0 to +1 LSB? Or the converse? My data books don't indicate that this is a restriction. Nor does the Burr Brown sheet you've posted.

The drawing you show does not represent what happens when you do the 1 LSB swing and then run through the anti-imaging filter. But I'm sure you knew that. Nonetheless, the comedic effect could give people the wrong idea.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2003, 11:04 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Sandy H.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC - USA
Unhappy In all seriousness. . .

. . . you guys can really play with the uninformed guy's head!

I followed the conversions from binary to base 10 (and hex, just for fun?) and understand the elementary version of how this corresponds to the -1 to +1V analog, but, being a young ME who has only the experience of 1 semester's (voluntary) coursework with an intro to digital electronics, I am easily lost between fact and tongue and cheek. Having said that, I am a fan of both Steve and Fred's brand of humor, but often it just goes over the ol' head.

If anybody can suggest a somewhat readable textbook which would make me more comfortable in reading the digital section of this forum, I'd be glad to take the challenge and hopefully at least be a lurker here in the future. Honestly, though, you guys just scare me on occasion. After that, for dichotomy, a book on analog amplification might help me be able to view posts in the tubes forum. For clarification, I don't plan on being a contributor to either fora, as I think there is experience in both which I could not match with simple learning.

Help!!!

Sandy.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2003, 11:15 PM   #28
diyAudio Member
 
Steve Eddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Default Re: In all seriousness. . .

Quote:
Originally posted by Sandy H.
If anybody can suggest a somewhat readable textbook which would make me more comfortable in reading the digital section of this forum, I'd be glad to take the challenge and hopefully at least be a lurker here in the future.
I'd recommend Ken C. Pohlmann's Principles of Digital Audio, ISBN 0-07-134819-0.

se
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2003, 11:20 PM   #29
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: As far from the NOSsers as possible
Default My turn to pour gasoline on the fire....

This is directly from the '1702 data sheet......the oldest DAC that I have data on.

I assume that we don't have any Second Class Telephone Sanatizers here, and that everyone can do the math themselves.

(I really love these food fights......livens up an otherwise slow day.)


Jocko
Attached Images
File Type: gif 1702.gif (11.0 KB, 340 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2003, 11:28 PM   #30
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sweden
What are you guys up to, posting a lot of DAC data? They just
show what we already know, that the output voltage/current
is a linear function of the digital input. Sure, it tells what the
constant is for a particular DAC, but that is irrelevant to the
qusstion of dynamic range of the digital medium.
  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
Dynamic Range...? Lyra Digital Source 40 2nd October 2007 11:44 PM
Dynamic range vs Jitter ? ash_dac Digital Source 6 3rd March 2007 10:58 PM
SNR/Dynamic range worsens in low frequency range. percy Digital Source 3 1st June 2006 12:41 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:38 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