The Black Hole......

again... somewhere in here you will find the answer to your questions....covers the CW and Real-Time.

What’s The Difference Between Real-Time And Sampling Oscilloscopes? | Electronic Design

Real-Time Versus Equivalent-Time Sampling | Tektronix

CD works to a fair degree. No one advocating breaking any laws. Is it the best way and is the sampling rate high enough?

You can decide for yourself. In the end, if you cant hear any difference, with your system and ears, between 16/44 and 24/192, then there is no need to go any further in debating it.
I wonder whether you have read these articles yourself.
The one from Agilent from 2013 compares a Digital Storage Scope to a Digital Sampling Scope.
So both are 100% digital.

A sampling scope can only work with repetitive HF signals, incomparable to Audio sampling.
A DSO on the other hand reconstructs signals on the screen, just as a audio AD/DA, by sampling, upsampling and filtering.
Tektronics in it’s paper mentions that the BW they use for a perfect reconstruction is Fs/2.5.

So it seems you have shot in your own feet, because these documents are confirming that 10x Fs is a gospe.

Hans
 
Last edited:
No, not at all.....that part wasn’t meant towards you.

I suppose some just don’t do well with changes.......somewhere there’s probably someone watching a black and white tv because ‘we don’t need none of that thar new fangled color stuff’ 😛
Okey dokey 🙂 I wouldn't be unhappy to discover I'm missing very little by sticking with my CD's 😉 BTW the black and white v colour analogy is one of the worst I've read........
 
😱 😕 :bawling: :whazzat:

You did read it didn't you?

Sampling scopes are uniquely designed to capture, display, and analyze repetitive signals. Triggering capabilities are likewise crafted for repetitive signals. A sampling scope will capture a set of non-contiguous samples spaced in time when it sees its first trigger condition. The scope delays the trigger point, captures the next set of points, and places them on its display with the first set of points. It repeats this process, building up the waveform in an infinite-persistent mode over successive acquisitions.
 
In the end I don’t understand the resistance to bettering the technology?
People with cd’s will still be able to listen to them, it’s not like the streaming mafia will come take your collection by force. 😀


There is no resistance. Just questioning. If a CD costs me $10, 24/96 $15 and 24/192 $20 (for example) what am I getting for the extra spend? If nothing audible on the music I listen to then why pay more. I can buy more music.
 
You have posted over the last months at least 50 times how much better Hi-res sounds.
Yet in substantiating this statement you fail to produce a single name for a representative track.

That places these comments in the same category as the supposed influence of the mains supply on the FR of the Quad ESL.
It's obviously all from hear say.

In comparisons of differing resolution formats, has verification been done that it is exactly the same recording used in each case?

It is argued that for the higher sampling rates, the masters are tweeked to give a difference, so that the customer is assured of the format's inherent better quality, to aid sales.
 
Scott,

With the strange weather lately, it is possible the devil ice skated to work.

Howie,

Are those microphones Beyer M500s? I seem to recall fragile hyper-cardioid ribbons that start rolling off around 18,000 hertz.

Hi Ed,

It sure looks like they could be, given the poor resolution of the vid...my memory of years ago working with them is they sound brittle (peaky or breakup in the HF?), but without an A/B against other mics I know well (U87, RE20, C414) in a studio space I would be hesitant to push that claim very far...

Cheers,
Howie
 
There is no resistance. Just questioning. If a CD costs me $10, 24/96 $15 and 24/192 $20 (for example) what am I getting for the extra spend? If nothing audible on the music I listen to then why pay more. I can buy more music.

I don’t think your freedom of choice is at risk 😛

In the case of streaming it all costs the same once you get the top tier pkg....I’m not sure how much Qobuz is but tidal hi-res is $20 a month.

You can download the music, I’m not sure if you can transfer it to another media though, or what happens to your downloads if you cancel the subscription? So ‘ownership’ might be a grayish area in regards to streaming.

But, you form a playlist (single tracks or whole albums) and it stays with you, on demand anytime you want. I’ve only lost one track from my playlist in almost 2 yrs.
 
Anyone on here ever tried to copy a streamed download?
Looks as though you can with certain apps/programs.

Once you get into high res streaming it’s really quite awesome, it also doesn’t mean you have to give up your physical collection.......even though I haven’t touched a cd in almost 2yrs!

I can’t wait to bring it to the next performance level.
 
From what I read today many early recordings were possibly full of aliasing artifacts. FDNR (frequency dependent negative resistance) filters were of interest back then and I think Bruce inspired me to put this on one of my data sheets. It's an anti-imaging filter for 88.2k up sampled CD audio and not an abrupt brick wall but flat group delay up to 20k.

Fr. response, phase, group delay

George
 

Attachments

  • Scott's Antiimaging Filter.asc
    Scott's Antiimaging Filter.asc
    6.6 KB · Views: 64
  • Scott's Antiimaging filter.png
    Scott's Antiimaging filter.png
    59.3 KB · Views: 192