Looks like MP3s might be starting to not be so popular - Page 4 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

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 24th June 2013, 03:57 PM   #31
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Skokie Il
Quote:
Originally Posted by benb View Post
Here's some good lessons in controlling digital data: The Scientist and Engineer's Guide to Digital Signal Processing
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2013, 07:07 PM   #32
diyAudio Member
 
regiregi22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Madrid (Spain)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie D View Post
You know I have a lot to learn about this stuff. I'm an analog guy. If I could control digital data as precisely as I do my analog stuff, I'd happily roll my own. But I have a long way to go in this arena.
Errrr.... I think you are wrong in your concept. Digital data is far more controllable and predictable, invariable, don't affected by interferences, than analog stuff. That's the main point of it. You have almost no control on what happens to any analog signal.

You can struggle to shield it from external factors, but in the end, that's something digital signals are by nature inmune to.
__________________
diyAudio, doing it as big as you can, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN!
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2013, 03:52 PM   #33
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Skokie Il
I understand everything you are saying.

My wording is misleading I guess. I'm really sharp with analog circuits. I understand their caveats vs digital circuits. I know how to juggle the shortcomings of analog circuits, and how to mitigate issues with them, to get the result I desire. I have no such ability with digital circuits. I understand the basics, but I need to come up to speed.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st July 2013, 04:20 AM   #34
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_push_pull View Post
everyone seems to forget that one minute of uncompressed HD video would need ~6G of space
True, but I often record in Adobe ProRes format that needs about 1GB per minute at 720P 60fps. It's compressed, but you can't tell by looking at it. It's visually superb. So much better than broadcast.

Compression can work well, especially as a final delivery format.
__________________
Take the Speaker Voltage Test!
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2013, 07:08 AM   #35
diyAudio Member
 
regiregi22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Madrid (Spain)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pano View Post
True, but I often record in Adobe ProRes format that needs about 1GB per minute at 720P 60fps. It's compressed, but you can't tell by looking at it. It's visually superb. So much better than broadcast.

Compression can work well, especially as a final delivery format.
Compression can look well (look at Bluray as an example) if not bad implementing. Problem with DVB-T is that in order to fit 4 channels per band they apply a hell of a compression.

BTW, from what sources do you get 60fps video?
__________________
diyAudio, doing it as big as you can, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN!
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2013, 01:22 PM   #36
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
I get it from my Sony Pro cameras, uncompressed. As it's not practical to store uncompressed video, we use the ProRes format. It is compressed, but not badly. It's very difficult to see any artifacts.

If the compression down to Blu-Ray, WMV9 or H.264 is done right, it does look pretty darn good and allows a much easier transport and storage. The trade-offs are well worth it.
__________________
Take the Speaker Voltage Test!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2013, 10:10 AM   #37
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Western China
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bibliophile View Post
Alas, too late for my failing ears.
Developments on that front are moving apace as well. Perhaps in 10 years a method of reculturing the neurons of the ear and basically resetting your hearing to what it was as a new born.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2013, 10:17 AM   #38
AndrewT is offline AndrewT  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
when watching Digital TV I see regular digital artefacts, especially on slowly moving faces/facial features.
Is this a compression problem, that we are stuck with?

Or is it a decompression problem in our receiving equipment?
If so, what can we do about it?
__________________
regards Andrew T.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2013, 01:07 PM   #39
diyAudio Member
 
regiregi22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Madrid (Spain)
It depends, some artifacts are due to an overhelming compression ratio used to be able to pack more channels per band. Sometimes they occur because a poor reception, but this less common because of digital nature of yes/no.

Are you talking about cable or terrestial when you say Digital TV?
__________________
diyAudio, doing it as big as you can, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2013, 01:26 PM   #40
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: At the output stage
Send a message via Yahoo to mr_push_pull
while not being familiar with the digital TV transmission protocol, one thing I do know is that it depends on the TV.
if you're watching non-HD channels, the TV is doing the resampling. and, even with models which are more than decent at HD, this resampling is very poor. it's a rather common issue and I would guess the first thing where cost-saving is done.
but if it happens with HD...
__________________
we all love a good ol' stereotype until it's against us
  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
Bit Perfect MP3s? Pano PC Based 7 6th December 2011 02:29 AM
Why do MP3s' sound so bad? Richard Ellis Everything Else 19 24th September 2007 07:20 AM
Reason to convert MP3s to WAV? PeteMcK Everything Else 5 13th November 2006 06:20 AM
High Quality MP3s - an attempt Mikett Digital Source 9 14th August 2005 10:25 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:21 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