Maybe a few select classical labels but the majority of studios use 24/48k.
I don't know many that even bother with 24/96k.
Such is life in Pro Audio 🙂
TCD
Why am I not on your ignore list ?P.S. Embarrased is "embarrassé", "confus" is confused. So it's safe to say "Tu es confuse" even in this matter.
Is he not fantastic ? Now he is teaching-me my native language.
P.S. Embarrased is "embarrassé", "confus" is confused. So it's safe to say "Tu es confuse" even in this matter.
YouTube
TIP: "Confus" can be used in the two meaning: Je suis confus ("I'm confused" ) and Je suis vraiment confus ("I am really sorry").
Be re-assured, you are. (In my ignore list )
Last edited:
This thread is depressing me these days, I consider jn, syn08, and Tournesol my friends who could sit down in a reasonable context and discuss these issues rationally. Instead we have acrimony.
You seem to miss the elementary detail that many of us, Canadians, are very much bilingual from a very early age. Although you may have a very hard time digesting the Montreal spoken French, as much as I may have a big problem with processing the Franco-Provençal.
This being said, could you please provide an English or French translation of what you meant in your usual rant above, against somebody that dared to disagree with you and nicely suggest (aka "confused", instead of <insert your favorite expletive here>) that you should check your facts before touching the keyboard?
What, no RNM
? That's even more depressing. Et tu, Brute?Seriously, what I find really depressing is the lack of wilness to accept facts and give up one inch of the faith based "knowledge". Facts which are not even subject to possible interpretation (like the CFA vs. VFA stupid debate).
Last edited:
PHP:
Well, OK, but that's setting rather a low bar 🙂
I had to develop a frequency-lock / phase-lock motor control servo system that used a 56k, with the code in assembler. I've written assembler for lots of other processors, including the x86, but for some reason dealing with the 56k stands out as the most traumatic experience. It was satisfying finally to beat the thing into submission, but I resolved never to do it again.
You do not understand of engineering, I think. The theory is not wrong, but it is difficult to get high accuracy at high frequency at the implementation.
I am thankful that I don't have to drop to assembler. The Delta Tau's we use have a reasonable higher level language. The best thing about the DT's is the powerful ability to write and access the registers of all the PID code blocks. I can easily code up adaptive tuning algorithms for non linear systems. And, the controller can update 8 independent PID loops at 400 uSec rates.
The worst thing is...the powerful ability to write and access the registers of all the PID code blocks.
So much of the training for the units surrounds soft tunings and linear predictors as opposed to optimal hard tuning. The vendor understands that the vast majority of the controls engineers do not have the engineering background to do really good tuning. Nor do the engineers really understand motors like 3 phase brushless or steppers. And geometric based stability issues, forget it.
Jn
Last edited:
I know. I have spent the last few months avoiding this thread because of the acrimony.
I suspect I will again pull back for a while, as it is rather refreshing to not have to deal with those who simply come to argue.
Happy new year Scott.
Jn
Hostie de criss de câlice de tabarnak!.
Really not from my side, I'm amused.
https://cdn001.tintin.com/public/tintin/img/static/le-professeur-tournesol/C15 49 D1.jfif
Last edited:
Because this is about high quality audio reproduction. We need high accuracy as possible by today engineering. It is not necessary too much for hearing ability, because your hearing ability must be different than others. May be it is too much for your.
When tasked with developing any complex system, the first question must be...what are the specifications.
For a sound system that has to produce a stable and reproducible soundstage, it requires understanding localization. That localization parametrics are unheard of or unknown by some here on this thread astounds me.
That cosine rule level only pan pots still exist boggles the imagination, there is no further need to support mono compatibility.
That nobody even considers the significant difference between point, line, and planar speakers in the IID near field equations is boggling.
The assumption that redbook is by default adequate to support interchannel localization requirements is also astounding. Whenever I post the base requirements, the first response is always "bs". Followed by its not a problem. Followed by misunderstandings of sampling rudimentary concepts.
It is important, if one wishes to engage in a discussion, to actually read and understand what is being posted.
I hope for those days. Alas, I suspect on this forum, the tone has become one of turf wars, condescension, and testosterone. I see no indication of change.
Jn
Last edited:
wow. This is great..... even to you they do that. Every single sentence i write gets spun into something unimaged before. How do some people even are able to hold a job.
I just keep trying to say the same things over and over from various angles in the hope that the concept gets thru at least. cant even get a concept thru.... before the details.
-------------------------------------
The sampling rate is too low and the BW is not wide enough and yes we need to consider the phase integrity, too.
There never has been any issue with Nyquist. Except it application using minimal needed performance ref to CD. Maybe, which is fine for communications industry (CW signals) works best. No complaints there. Just for the details that high-end cares about needs greater resolution. You hear it.
There is no point in trying to straw man or one-up me. Instead, get on with the process needed to increase resolution all the way to 20KHz in an almost random noise like signal of transient behaviour -- music, sounds.
LOng live CD. Its dead like LP for a technology. Can we move on and figure what is better than CD? If you are happly with LP records or CD, then fine. If you think it can be better, lets set new minimum standards.
In the meantime, there already is now and has been available higher quality and more accurate digital recordings. Which one to standardize on? DSD? What?
Well, so this has been entertaining but as usual not productive in moving the needle.
I deal with ideas and concepts, mostly. My starting point. The forest and what is outside the forest. Not the trees, leaves and bugs in the forest. I ask you guys because you know all the details and little bugs and things living under the leafs. I cant get you unstuck from yourselves. You know who I am talking about.... youre fired!
🙂 <3
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I wasn't aware the discussion had moved from sampling theory to interchannel localization requirements.
I have no dog in your ITD fight - I haven't investigated this in detail myself. That said, it seems totally acceptable to me to assume Redbook is sufficient. My system has no problem producing a stable and reproducible soundstage with 44.1 or 48 kHz files, including binaural recordings. The mass adoption and market penetration of 44.1/48 over the past 40 years should not be ignored. All proposed successors to this day have failed to gain any significant traction. DSD and high-res PCM can't even consistently prove they are audibly superior in well-constructed studies that I am aware of. If this is a significant problem, it should be possible to generate files to demonstrate it and compare with higher sample rate versions?
In terms of understanding, I agree, and that goes both ways. I normally find your posts enlightening and logic sound... but we did just have a 2 page discussion because you introduced an example of why Nyquist is inadequate which actually violated it (zero-crossing @ Fs/2).
Do you write and simulate it it in Matlab + Simulink and then generate the C, or do you write your own implementation?
The requirements are different. You should be careful who you accuse of being deaf, they might accuse you of being delusional. I don't mind overkill and would be happy if 24/88.2 or 24/96 became standard, but I have a hard time arguing that 16/44.1 is completely inadequate.
Last edited:
Now where did this new straw-man come from?
it is adequate. it is not excellent.
Cymbal doesnt sound the way a real cymbal sounds for example. Bring one in your room and compare real to your hi-fi.
[near field]
If improving the accuracy is not important, then one doesn't have to participate. Its OK to love your LP or CD based system.
-RNM
Last edited:
Man, it will take quite some time to heal that bruised ego of yours!
And because you mentioned it, one of the “some here” simply asked what is the relationship between the “localization parametrics” and the Nyquist theorem. The answer was a deafening silence. Then another one showed black on white how to resolve 0.1 degrees of phase inter channel within the redbook framework sampling. The answer was a deafening silence.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.