I’m not sure you can have too much clarity
But I’m pretty sure sharpness can get excessive.......I was just giving you a way to recognize the new sharpness distortion in the crowd....
...’excessive sharpness’
has a nice ring to it
Then I really don't get T's photo comparison What Does Sharpness Mean When Talking About Photography?
Probably not, since it can mean higher than correctly pitched.
Maybe make a mental note that when people object to SD dacs as overly detailed, or as fatiguing, they are probably talking about the same issue as T is.
Since I can't prove the mastering ADC didn't put it on the CD, I can't prove it is dac distortion, but I surely have reason to be suspicious of that when I upsample to DSD and playback through the same dac, it sounds subjectively better and less of that objectionable, sharp, fatiguing thing, whatever it is. Where did it go if it was supposed to be there? Is the absence of it a distortion?
Music has been known to bring a tear when you have gotten it dialed in.
With people referring to numbers and books, instead of listening to their emotions or sensual experiences (a crime), the fantastic creativity of the golden years of art (60-80) is not near to come back.
Same thing happens in photography with the fashion of DXO measurements for lenses. A steril and clinical world where nobody can distinguish between two almost perfectly smooth and boring spheres.
Samething, in a way for cars, all the same all over the world.
There is no qualities where there is no defects.
Objectivity leaves no room for the imagination, so for creativity.
Partially, IMHO. What usually goes along with ADC sound quality is the quality of mics, effects processing, and the acoustical quality of the recording space. There are many small studios with small budgets now. Used to be a smaller number of big studios with bigger budgets. Studios use was time domain multiplexed, now everyone can have his own full time. The people operating the equipment are often much less well trained than before. In other words, pretty much everything has changed. All, IMHO of course.
Which version of Pro Tools hardware was that? The early stuff had a bad reputation, but it got much better for the professional equipment (and for the prosumer stuff too) over time. Some people still kept Crane Song, Prism, etc, converters for maybe the lead vocals or other important tracks if they could afford that level of gear.
Last edited:
There hasn't been any sound waves arriving at our ears and we can hear but cannot be measured with present day sound measuring devices so fear not.
As for the proof of DAC comparison goes?
Hum. Pro Tools has never been a reference in audio. It is just a computer based editing suite for TV and movies that can manage the audio tracks.
Unless something has changed recently ?
I haven't tried to listen for it, but some people can hear it. ESS mentioned the effect in one presentation. Howie Hoyt has described hearing it. Don't know how many people hear it, but it exists. Also mentioned in a AES paper here: AES Convention Papers Forum >> An Efficient Second-Order Dynamic Element Matching Technique for a 120-dB Multi-Bit Delta-Sigma DAC
Maybe something helpful here: AES E-Library >> Noise Modulation in Digital Audio Devices
Last edited:
Is it part of DAC sound to compare, meaning that some DACs produce it to audible level and other DACs don't?
Please see: AES E-Library >> Noise Modulation in Digital Audio Devices
It may be the first proposed equipment test developed based on psycho-acoustic principles.
Might be necessary to go there again for reverb tail reproduction, and or 'sharpness.' Don't know.
Cabot's article on Noise floor modulation is also here & not behind a paywall
Stereophile used Cabot's ideas to measure DACs here but couldn't find a correlation to how the DACs sounded. Essentially they measured noise floor at different signal levels. Not sure this is the right way to approach it? No dynamic test signal - 41Hz sine wave at different signal levels - all below -60dB
Stereophile used Cabot's ideas to measure DACs here but couldn't find a correlation to how the DACs sounded. Essentially they measured noise floor at different signal levels. Not sure this is the right way to approach it? No dynamic test signal - 41Hz sine wave at different signal levels - all below -60dB
Last edited:
PT has been in music studios for quite some years now. How long have you been out of the business?
So what you are indirectly saying is that there is no proof that "$200 or $500 dacs that measure pretty well sound as good as any dac can ever sound, they don't." Got it.
Not out of the audio business, but the record industry: I was in the movie/video post prod buziness at the last decades of my audio pro life. A near virgin territory to explore, while music was dying. But I had continued to record and mix few albums from time to time, more as a hobby than for a living. As well as collaborating to pro and consumer gear design in parallel.
This explain my question. I was not a fan of Pro tools as well. Dolby like ;-)
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.