Was that Miwaukee station called WZMF? I was an avid listener.
I don't think so.
I’m surprised mobile phones are driving high performance audio. Who are they kidding?
While at my former employer, we made a killing in China on tne smartphones (Huawei et al) on an audio chip that maximized speaker volume and prevented damage.
I think a few who frequent this thread were snooping around our business - but like all mobile phone stuff, the first guy in makes the money and then it quickly commoditizes. The sensible thing to do then is exit and let the others fight over the scraps.
While at my former employer, we made a killing in China on tne smartphones (Huawei et al) on an audio chip that maximized speaker volume and prevented damage.
I think a few who frequent this thread were snooping around our business - but like all mobile phone stuff, the first guy in makes the money and then it quickly commoditizes. The sensible thing to do then is exit and let the others fight over the scraps.
Was that Miwaukee station called WZMF? I was an avid listener.
I think it was WMSE.
Attachments
Last edited:
Hello George.
I hear progressive differences in tracks 9>16 as follows..
The 16.44 file sounds veiled
Once in 24bit res and at 96k the sound is pretty good and it is the subjective envelope that improves with higher sample rates.
I reckon it is this digital unnatural enveloping that is objected to by analog enthusiasts.
IMO you don't need supersonic hearing to notice the enveloping differences
Max.
Good listening info. Continues to verify that with the higher sampling rates (above CD/44) sound more accurate.
Whether it is because of JN's discovery or wider BW or all of the above, it is clearly improved over CD.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Yeah, the extra info in HiRes audio opens the ambience of the sound a bit like going from MP3 to FLAC, it can be argued that 1644 is a lossy format and that higher res formats are less lossy, good vinyl is surface noisy but programme less lossy wrt cdGood listening info. Continues to verify that with the higher sampling rates (above CD/44) sound more accurate.
Could you summarise refresh me on this JN discovery please.Whether it is because of JN's discovery or wider BW or all of the above, it is clearly improved over CD.
I ran some experiments with generating 315Hz+1575Hz signals with the lower fr tone at same start point as the 315Hz tone or delayed by 225* of the higher tone.
The two waveforms display differently in DAW with the inphase pair peaking at higher level than the delayed pair.
I find the two mixdowns to sound subtly different with the inphase 5th harmonic pair sounding slightly brighter or harder and the delayed pair sound better separated more as two discrete tones and overall subjectively slightly less loud.
Max.
Last edited:
well, get some!
No interest, but you knew that.
I ran some experiments with generating 315Hz+1575Hz signals with the lower fr tone at same start point as the 315Hz tone or delayed by 225* of the higher tone.
The two waveforms display differently in DAW with the inphase pair peaking at higher level than the delayed pair.
I find the two mixdowns to sound subtly different with the inphase 5th harmonic pair sounding slightly brighter or harder and the delayed pair sound better separated more as two discrete tones and overall subjectively slightly less loud.
There are no DAC filters that could possibly cause 225 degrees of phase shift at these frequencies. This is a misdirection.
No interest, but you knew that.
Yeah. But, try something new.
Take a risk. You might like it.
HD version
YouTube
A few of these in your living room.... that should get it done.
-Richard
Last edited:
I think you misunderstand this is nothing to do with DAC filters.There are no DAC filters that could possibly cause 225 degrees of phase shift at these frequencies. This is a misdirection.
I used Cool Edit to add two waves 315Hz and 1575Hz same amplitude but different start offsets, FFT will state same spectral content and so it is but the DAW displayed waveform is different and with different peak factor according to the time offset of these two harmonically related sines (5th).
I am saying that these two waveforms do indeed sound subtly different, iow timing of harmonics is audible under this test condition and part of envelope perception.
We had that beat in 1996 (?) with a 60" diameter woofer which became legendary in the car audio competition circuit, theoretically capable of producing over 180 dB. We had it mounted in the partition of a box van...we couldn't go any louder than 160 some odd dB because it repeatedly blew the windows out and broke the back door latches even after we had a 2" thick plexiglass windshield and custom door braces made for it:
It was ridiculous...the truck sides breathed in and out over an inch and would bounce you away from it if you were leaning on it. We first fired it up sitting upside down on the floor and it launched itself and started bouncing around the factory floor until we shut it off in alarm...
it was never intended to be musical, it was only to show how stupid the max SPL contests were...no one else ever came close. On the serious side of contesting our Speakerworks Buick GN was a really great sounding car and ushered in the era of sound quality measurements in car audio, and contracts with GM and IH designing mobile sound systems...a million years ago...
Cheers!
Howie
There are no DAC filters that could possibly cause 225 degrees of phase shift at these frequencies. This is a misdirection.
It seems we have a new “inventor” on board
Hans
got bass?
-RNM
Of Alabama 3s output I prefer this
YouTube
But your idea of bass and mine differ. Bass should go down to 20Hz
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- The Black Hole......