What does make sense is to do the RIAA EQ in analog due to the large dynamic range needed, as in digital domain you lose many bits at the low-end and would have a hard time avoiding audible quantization artifacts after the EQ.
Linear Audio | your tech audio resource
It really is not the problem that people think it is.
did you build it?
No, there is an improved version that was published on here that I am building. MiniDSP is inline for all sources in my system so I can run any variant that I desire.
BTW You appear to have got out of bed on the wrong side, I suggest you step away from the internet for a while...
BTW You appear to have got out of bed on the wrong side, I suggest you step away from the internet for a while...
possibly maybe... i have no problem with real projects for DIY if they are for free, but i have a feeling that DIY audio might soon turn into an online electronic kit shop.BTW You appear to have got out of bed on the wrong side, I suggest you step away from the internet for a while...
Well...who are those lots of people, it's my initial question?
I'd replicate such a system for my own use if open source or buy it just to have an evaluation.
A mini DSP does it, it only takes at most two IIR biquads even an RPi can do it. SoX is free and will do RT RIAA in software.
I know you're the MAN, but I'm sorry...i can't understand this language!!! Could you show a real product ?A photo, name of a dsp, a source code, a price...whatever that works for somebody like me who has no digital background and who wants to see it done?
How is that someone who admits to having "no digital background" can vigorously (and falsely) assert that digital delay will be a problem in RIAA and insist on proof from those who know otherwise?
My own understanding is that delay is not a problem at all, and dynamic range is now a soluble problem.
My own understanding is that delay is not a problem at all, and dynamic range is now a soluble problem.
possibly maybe... i have no problem with real projects for DIY if they are for free, but i have a feeling that DIY audio might soon turn into an online electronic kit shop.
Who said DIY has to be free? If someone puts time into something they are allowed to ask for recompense. Scott gives everything away because he is nice like that as do many others, but you need to put some work in.
Plenty of DSP solutions that will run the biquads needed (biquad is a mathematical way of defining an IIR filter, which at 10,000 feet is the digital equivalent of a perfect analog filter).
All the information is posted, but for free you are not going to be spoonfed. Not the way it works. You get out what you put in.
Having to have an extra ~40dB of dynamic range is exactly the problem people think it is! That's approx 7 more ADC bits needed for the low-end and you've got to think about anti-aliasing filter performance again so it doesn't inject aliased noise over that very low level bass region. Certainly seems like using analog EQ is the way to go (it can be combined with an anti-aliasing filter too)
Spend the €2.99 and read the article please. This is covered. 24/96 ADC are standard fare these days and you have plenty of DR. ChannelD has been selling well for years now with no complaints about dynamic range with a flat Phono amplifier CHANNEL D - Professional and Audiophile Quality Software for Vinyl, iTunes, and commercial applications.
There is a fear of loss of resolution, but this is not borne out in reality. Now if a personal preference is to have EQ in the analog domain I'm not going to argue with that 🙂
There is a fear of loss of resolution, but this is not borne out in reality. Now if a personal preference is to have EQ in the analog domain I'm not going to argue with that 🙂
I just quoted somebody else who really is a master in that digital domain(and not only)...But he's done very limited trials a decade ago...so maybe he'd do it again much better...He's earning his money from much more advanced projects...some of them sit well on many audiophile desks 10-15 years ago, some still does today.How is that someone who admits to having "no digital background" can vigorously (and falsely) assert that digital delay will be a problem in RIAA and insist on proof from those who know otherwise?
My own understanding is that delay is not a problem at all, and dynamic range is now a soluble problem.
Anyway...I have put my faith in YOU!
Last edited:
Not the whole phono stage but.....
This one I like. 🙂
Almost no additional weight.
Still only need 2 wires per channel.
Almost like some microphone capsules with built-in FETs.
You can do even better today with hand picked (matched) 2SK209 for minimum additional weight.
Readily available.
Patrick
Having to have an extra ~40dB of dynamic range is exactly the problem people think it is!
No it's not, the ChannelD site also has an AES presentation detailing why it is not.
Almost like some microphone capsules with built-in FETs.
You can do even better today with hand picked (matched) 2SK209 for minimum additional weight.
Readily available.
Right, easy to do and the impedance transformation and low impedance drive give you most of the benefit. The phantom power microphone principles work here and it give one the option of simply using a USB box with phantom power built in and software RIAA.
This looks more like your own interest and enjoyment than the real thing...Are you God?And offends the maximum number of people 🙂
Every single time i see one of your comments it's like seeing a Romanian policeman(or GOD!!!) hidden in a civilian car waiting for you to step out of the house and giving you a fine for walking across the alley cause there was no crosswalk in front of your house...Sadly...i really witnessed something like this a few years ago...So maybe i'm oversensitive to this behavior 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Source & Line
- Analogue Source
- Putting a super light phono amp inside the tonearm?