hypex ncore - Page 716 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Vendor Forums > Vendor's Bazaar

Vendor's Bazaar Commercial Vendors large & small hawking their wares

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 15th September 2013, 06:12 PM   #7151
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juhleren View Post
Arcam DVD capable of HDCD decoding vs Naim CD5 only 16 bit decoding.
Actually, your description is pretty much exactly what can be expected if playing a HDCD-encoded recording on a non-HDCD-aware player. See HFN: The HDCD Enigma

"One curious consequence of this is that if the listener tries an HDCD with soft peak limiting on two players – one HDCD and the other CD – they may not like the uncorrected distortion (introduced by HDCD recording) when played on the CD player. So such a comparison may give an impression that HDCD is inherently ‘better’, when in reality a normal CD made of the same source material might also have sounded much better than the HDCD played on the CD player. In essence, the use of the peak alterations may cause CD replay to sound ‘worse’ rather than show HDCD as genuinely ‘better’."

Quote:
Yes, absolutely no "absolute" in the world of hifi or the world in general.
The way I read you, is that this is relative -meaning that when looking at the probable loss in information it is relatively small in comparison to other losses/distortions/deformations of the digital signal, right?

If I read you right, an important assumption must be that these types of deformations of the signal are comparable not just quantitatively, but also qualitatively in terms of how we perceive them. Of course if this is true, we can disregard looking at sources of signal deformations that should be "hidden" in other types of limitations. Practically speaking, time and money should be better spend somewhere else. Am I still on the right track?
Definitely.

Quote:
When relating this to the digital domain, my question is that how can we be sure that the same thing is not happening -that quantitatively small sources of distortion can still bare significant audibility, although other apparent limitations should seem much larger?
Nothing is ever 100% sure, but a heck of a lot of research, and pretty massive controlled listening tests have been done by Bell Labs and others.

Quote:
Please excuse my ignorance on this subject, but would the argument be that because digitalized information IS nothing but quantitative levels, nothing can possible be "hidden" between these levels? And therefore we should be able to go as far to reduce the bit depth to the dynamic range of the signal, right?
Right.

Quote:
Dithering, I am not qualified to discuss, but from my understanding it is a method that works by introducing low level noise to the signal in order to modulate the bit depth of the signal from say 16bits to 24 or even 32? How does this method actually alter the quantized levels of the source material into more bit depth? I assume it must somehow be adding information that was not present in the source material, right?
It doesn't add anything that wasn't there, but it shifts the noise. There is a pretty good illustration here: Australian Hifi: What is Dither?
__________________
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2013, 07:28 PM   #7152
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juhleren View Post
Dithering, I am not qualified to discuss, but from my understanding it is a method that works by introducing low level noise to the signal in order to modulate the bit depth of the signal from say 16bits to 24 or even 32? How does this method actually alter the quantized levels of the source material into more bit depth? I assume it must somehow be adding information that was not present in the source material, right?
Once again I am recommending Monty Montgomery's Digital Show & Tell, the part about dither is quite illustrative.

If you don't have the time or patience to watch the video, there is a text version as well, but actually seeing the waveforms is an educating experience.
__________________
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2013, 08:08 PM   #7153
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julf View Post
Once again I am recommending Monty Montgomery's Digital Show & Tell, the part about dither is quite illustrative.

If you don't have the time or patience to watch the video, there is a text version as well, but actually seeing the waveforms is an educating experience.
Thanks again Julf!

I don't have the time right now, but will take a look at your recommendations as soon as time allows me to

all the best,
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2013, 09:59 PM   #7154
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: At the output stage
Send a message via Yahoo to mr_push_pull
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juhleren View Post
Dithering, I am not qualified to discuss, but from my understanding it is a method that works by introducing low level noise to the signal in order to modulate the bit depth of the signal from say 16bits to 24 or even 32? How does this method actually alter the quantized levels of the source material into more bit depth? I assume it must somehow be adding information that was not present in the source material, right?
I think you're misunderstanding dithering, it's not something that fixes what is broken, it prevents the signal from "breaking". once you sample w/o dither it's done and over with, you can't get data back.
I don't think it's possible to really prove that dithering is "perfect" because it would require an absolute understanding of human hearing.
the best way to understand it intuitively is this: think of a sine wave that's sampled with say 3 bits resolution, 1 bit corresponding to 1 volt. obviously you can't encode say 3.6 volts that way, only 3 and 4 is possible. but if you add noise, you'll actually be sampling 3.6+x (where x is the dither). the result will either be sampled as 3 (x<0.4) or 4 (x>=0.4). but statistically it will be 3, 4 times out of 10 and 4, 6 times out of ten. which averages to... 3.6.
the only plausible argument against dither is that the ear/brain system is not actually perceiving the averaged but that instandaneous value (3.6+x, in our case) but as far as current understanding goes that's not the case.
__________________
we all love a good ol' stereotype until it's against us
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2013, 05:08 PM   #7155
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: New York
reading up more on this, does anyone know off hand what the value of R141 is? I am running 101db sensitive speakers, and i want to either remove it, or lower the value so that gain is lower.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2013, 08:35 PM   #7156
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by ufokillerz View Post
reading up more on this, does anyone know off hand what the value of R141 is? I am running 101db sensitive speakers, and i want to either remove it, or lower the value so that gain is lower.
1.2K.

To quote Bruno: "Not much has changed since http://www.hypex.nl/docs/appnotes/gain_appnote.pdf

Gain is 4.17*(1+2*Rf/Rg). Rg=1.2k, Rf=2.2k. Rg, as noted in the bugs section of the data sheet is not marked (will be in the future), but it's called R141 and it's the one furthest to the left of the input connector. The maximum gain reduction you can get is 13.4dB, which is when you remove R141 altogether."
__________________
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2013, 09:34 PM   #7157
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Default ?

Julf, I am doing something wrong perhaps? But, using that formula with Rg=1.2, I end up with a gain of ~19.5? That does not seem right at all, as gain of the Ncore is supposed to be ~26?
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th September 2013, 03:57 AM   #7158
mogn is offline mogn  Denmark
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Denmark,Vanløse
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrows View Post
Julf, I am doing something wrong perhaps? But, using that formula with Rg=1.2, I end up with a gain of ~19.5? That does not seem right at all, as gain of the Ncore is supposed to be ~26?
26db = 19.5 gain
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th September 2013, 05:54 AM   #7159
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrows View Post
Julf, I am doing something wrong perhaps? But, using that formula with Rg=1.2, I end up with a gain of ~19.5? That does not seem right at all, as gain of the Ncore is supposed to be ~26?
A voltage gain of 19.5 equals 25.8 dB.
__________________
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2013, 04:38 PM   #7160
Tobi F is offline Tobi F  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Hi,

maybe its a stupid question.
But are there any other NCore modules planned for DIY ?
NC180 would be nice for active systems.

Cheers
Toby
  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
Hypex problem, who can help Hansms Class D 9 18th August 2013 06:49 AM
Hypex steveww Class D 14 18th November 2010 01:44 PM
Question for those who have tried hypex smps with hypex modules avian Class D 12 3rd March 2009 09:30 AM
Hypex UcD 180AD + signal wires, Power Supply ST, Hypex Transformer TR100A c10h12n2 Swap Meet 7 7th July 2007 03:55 PM
FS: Hypex UcD 400/180AD, hypex toroid Archmage Swap Meet 4 14th November 2006 04:23 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:43 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