I might as well ask the obvious question for others:
How do we know the 'input' data being compared to the output data is itself correct?
-RNM
How do we know the 'input' data being compared to the output data is itself correct?
-RNM
Yes, in a sense, the circuitry has to work harder to track a damaged disc. I say 'in a sense' because I suspect a whiff of anthropomorphism here: we would work harder to track a faulty disc, so we assume a box of electronics would have to too.Jakob2 said:
No, there is no additional work to correct data over and above the decoding which has to be done anyway even with perfect data.
Do they? That is not my understanding, as I have repeatedly said.
This is a completely different issue, you already stated that you understand my interest. So take the digital data and process it with any DAC you want. Claims like "we remove the jitter from the data before it is used", ARE hubris.
A CD played with a 750mW SET and full range horns will also sound different from JBL's and a 500W CFA (probably 🙂).
Last edited:
I just don't see why this is worth discussing. Even a dirt cheap drive can spin at high speed and successfully load up gigabytes of data, music, movies, programs, games etc etc every time with no errors.
Is it because audiophiles are limited to cables and wooden cones when it comes to 'upgrades' or a lack of knowledge about how digital audio works (or both).
Maybe when they spend serious cash on things like a CD lathe and a demagnetiser and none of it makes a dams worth of difference they blame the medium and digital audio in general.
Is it because audiophiles are limited to cables and wooden cones when it comes to 'upgrades' or a lack of knowledge about how digital audio works (or both).
Maybe when they spend serious cash on things like a CD lathe and a demagnetiser and none of it makes a dams worth of difference they blame the medium and digital audio in general.
Not a single CPU cycle is wasted for correcting the encoded data, according to Reed Solomon algorithm. The right output is always spit out of the decoder in exactly the same amount of time (or the same number of clock pulses, if you prefer).
Reed Solomon, cross interleave. There's lots of basic info out there on how that works.
It doesn't work this way, nothing is compared to decide if an error is occurring. When encoding, the encoder calculates extra bytes of data to be added to the "music" data. Calculating these bytes is not trivial, you need to understand the Solomon Reed math to get it, enough to know these extra bytes can be used to automatically reconstruct the original "music" data, without knowing it in advance, at the decoding time.
This is the whole strength of digital error correction: you don't need to know the original data to be able to correct a certain amount of errors (and signaling if more than that occurred).
The data -- Before RS encoding is applied.....
[encode/decode SR can still be GIGO]
?
-RNM
[encode/decode SR can still be GIGO]
?
-RNM
Last edited:
The data are encoded, then decoded the same way- that's how you know that you have the right bits. Unless you mean something entirely different by "the data" which is why I asked for definitions before descending into the Pit of Ignorance.
I know that.
I am - again- saying that the signal (data) BEFORE it is encoded can be inaccurate in some way before SR is applied.
THx-RNMarsh
I am - again- saying that the signal (data) BEFORE it is encoded can be inaccurate in some way before SR is applied.
THx-RNMarsh
It's inherently tied together. Are you trying to say there's some sort of error in the Soloman-Reed encoding of the PCM stream?
Richard do you mean that the data that is offered to the recording (and encoding) system may in some way not accurately represent the music going into the ADC?
I guess that is a possibility. It is also a different subject than we are discussing at the moment.
I mean, you can regress infinitely. Maybe the flute player during the recording put his finger on the wrong flute hole thereby creating a slight off-note sound. Surely we would not expect the CD player to correct for that. 😉
Jan
I guess that is a possibility. It is also a different subject than we are discussing at the moment.
I mean, you can regress infinitely. Maybe the flute player during the recording put his finger on the wrong flute hole thereby creating a slight off-note sound. Surely we would not expect the CD player to correct for that. 😉
Jan
The fact that the audio data is bad in the first place hardly has anything to do with the CD standards.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.