True, and people can learn to overcome the masking. In music listening there is also a tendency to notice the highest frequency present, with intermediate chordal frequencies being masked. Music majors that have to take a course in transcription of live orchestral performances find it very difficult at first, but eventually they develop skill at overcoming the masking and are able to transcribe intermediate pitched instruments in even in rather dense orchestration.
I see no protocols or detailed repeatable process laid out to verify any claims of audibility. I don't mean to be contentious but I spent weeks when selling amplifiers to the major cell phone manufacturers listening to reference designs and frankly never heard anything except different earbuds/headphones.
It would be difficult not to. I doubt you could come up with any weakly non-linear system that does not behave as expected.
I don't do exceptions as rules. That's for feminist.
If it makes you feel any better, I don't think about you ever, unless I'm reading your posts.
Bonsai, I read your paper and I don't necessarily agree with you. You have made many assumptions, including the definitions of TIM and SID. I know better since I worked with both parties on this issue back in the 1970's. You don't know as much as you think you do.
That makes it a day for this one then:
YouTube
https://files.diyaudio.com/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif
Well, I worked personally with Matti Otala at his lab in Finland, and also later at Harmon Kardon. I even co-authored a paper with him. I think that I know what Matti Otala thought TIM was, and it wasn't slew rate limiting.
I have personally known Walt Jung since 1974. He wanted me to work with him on SID, but Matti had contacted me first. Later, I got both Walt Jung and Matti Otala together at an AES to agree that SID is TIM. So there!
I have personally known Walt Jung since 1974. He wanted me to work with him on SID, but Matti had contacted me first. Later, I got both Walt Jung and Matti Otala together at an AES to agree that SID is TIM. So there!
Yep, a coworker built a DIY active oscilloscope probe with around 500 MHz bandwidth from a few op-amps. I think ADA4817 and OPA659 or something similar. Obviously not for audio, but the point remains.
Last edited:
OK so what version is correct? Slew Induced Distortion is in fact the same as the un-needed newly named TIM, and was noted in 1958 as that paper showed.
Did you ask where the 116dB figure came from? Perhaps it makes sense, perhaps not. It's an open forum though, you can ask.
For me that's not so important, I don't doubt that -130dB is well below the threshold of hearing, certainly I've never seen anything to make me doubt that.
But, if there's any decent evidence, happy to be convinced.
I have no idea where that number came from, but it sounds a bit extreme to me.
How many devices have input switches and volume controls that don't have -116 dB of "offness"?
This reminds me of an incident that happened at Harmon Kardon about 40 years ago. I was at a tech meeting with several engineers and managers, including Matti Otala. Well this on 'engineer' got up and tried to tell us what TIM was. Now, Matti and I did a paper together on TIM, and Matti invented the term, TIM, so this was almost laughable. Well, I interrupted this guy, to keep him from making a fool out of himself, and he got real mad at me, and threatened physical violence. He is long gone from the scene.
As oppossed to going where ? Yes they get fed back to the NEGATIVE input and then the amp corrects for it. Learn some control theory.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.