lol I didn't think he'd have a reply for that lmao....
Look guys, lets not pretend like we don't enjoy discussing the material here. I try to stick to basic aspects and then jump to the fringe of that aspect and see if adds up.
I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy the conversations we have here. I feel like a lot of good information has been shared here, and done so in an order that may relate to a lot of people who are getting deeper and deeper into the topics that are most relevant to building loudspeakers...Maybe it is my own personal approach that is being helped along by those of you who actually know the truths to some of the subject material brought about.
But, in the end, we all are enjoying ourselves and learning at the same time. =)
Look guys, lets not pretend like we don't enjoy discussing the material here. I try to stick to basic aspects and then jump to the fringe of that aspect and see if adds up.
I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy the conversations we have here. I feel like a lot of good information has been shared here, and done so in an order that may relate to a lot of people who are getting deeper and deeper into the topics that are most relevant to building loudspeakers...Maybe it is my own personal approach that is being helped along by those of you who actually know the truths to some of the subject material brought about.
But, in the end, we all are enjoying ourselves and learning at the same time. =)
Okey dokey
What was it you wanted to discuss about sampling rates required to reproduce a transient?
The sample rate is basically a carrier signal for the music signal itself, when looking at digital.....so the higher the frequency, the more points of data generated, the more accurately the system can replicate the impulse.
krivium - I'm sure you are right its just that I did not understand it so well until these recent discussions. Or maybe I understand it in a new light.
I was reading some discussion on the topic of audibility....some tend to think 96khz has a different sound vs 44.1khz and that they cannot hear an improvement to 192khz...something like that. Either way, with an better understanding of what it means in the first place, one might make different choices.
krivium - I'm sure you are right its just that I did not understand it so well until these recent discussions. Or maybe I understand it in a new light.
I was reading some discussion on the topic of audibility....some tend to think 96khz has a different sound vs 44.1khz and that they cannot hear an improvement to 192khz...something like that. Either way, with an better understanding of what it means in the first place, one might make different choices.
Last edited:
The best I've seen on GD:
Merlijn van Veen - Group Delay 101
Some more thoughts:
Audibility of group delay at low frequencies – Audio
I use Jeff Bagby's Woofer Box and Circuit Designer 6.0 to examine and adjust for phase and GD.
Jeff Bagby's Software Page
Filters
Archimago's Musings: INTERNET BLIND TEST: Linear vs. Minimum Phase Upsampling Filters
Archimago's Musings: MEASUREMENTS: Oppo UDP-205 Part 1: Output levels and digital filter settings... (And a few words about recent Munich 2018 MQA interview videos, McGill listening test out.)
Archimago's Musings: MEASUREMENTS: Digital Filters and Impulse Response... (TEAC UD-501)
I use the linear phase filter on my disc player.
More:
Archimago's Musings: Search results for linear phase filters
Archimago's Musings: INTERNET BLIND TEST: Linear vs. Minimum Phase Upsampling Filters
Archimago's Musings: MEASUREMENTS: Oppo UDP-205 Part 1: Output levels and digital filter settings... (And a few words about recent Munich 2018 MQA interview videos, McGill listening test out.)
Archimago's Musings: MEASUREMENTS: Digital Filters and Impulse Response... (TEAC UD-501)
I use the linear phase filter on my disc player.
More:
Archimago's Musings: Search results for linear phase filters
Yes i settled my own fs at 96khz and 24bit for my own gear and use as higher did not changed anyhing to me but at which sampling rate does it start to be annoyable?
I mean i have compact disks which are as enjoyable as vinyls or 'hi res' format ( not data compressed, in aiff or wav) for their sound and/or accuracy overall.
I'm far more intolerant to mp3 and other 'compressed' media ( except Flac)and can easily hear the difference even on my 'faulty' System 800 when i switch to internet radio.
This fs inflation doesn't mean anything to me, the differences are so tiny between what i've heard in DA ( and the budget to be engaged so big for those tiny differences) i don't see the point.
And as i'm user of dsp ok to 192khz and pc based filtering solution limited to 48khz ( i'm a cheapstake for digital and reuse computers running under xp with pro da circa 2005 for media being riped cd or a cd desk...) i can tell you can produce same kind of results with both.(both with external clock input possible and different ok clock source availlable).
This is a no brainer to me.
In comparison to the issue you potentially have to deal with loudspeakers i don't see the point implying there is coarse issue there ( if you use serious gear).
From my experience higher than 96khz doesnt bring anything from a direct source recording. If there will be some digital treatments involved before the first da stage , then some improvements could be expected for higher fs at 192khz but not on all materials ime. But it require some pretty good clock and this can be a very big economic investissment for little final gain.
Think about F1 or Bikes: up to a point it isn't costly to reduce weight then once the treshold is reached cost increase exponentially for each gramms...
I mean i have compact disks which are as enjoyable as vinyls or 'hi res' format ( not data compressed, in aiff or wav) for their sound and/or accuracy overall.
I'm far more intolerant to mp3 and other 'compressed' media ( except Flac)and can easily hear the difference even on my 'faulty' System 800 when i switch to internet radio.
This fs inflation doesn't mean anything to me, the differences are so tiny between what i've heard in DA ( and the budget to be engaged so big for those tiny differences) i don't see the point.
And as i'm user of dsp ok to 192khz and pc based filtering solution limited to 48khz ( i'm a cheapstake for digital and reuse computers running under xp with pro da circa 2005 for media being riped cd or a cd desk...) i can tell you can produce same kind of results with both.(both with external clock input possible and different ok clock source availlable).
This is a no brainer to me.
In comparison to the issue you potentially have to deal with loudspeakers i don't see the point implying there is coarse issue there ( if you use serious gear).
From my experience higher than 96khz doesnt bring anything from a direct source recording. If there will be some digital treatments involved before the first da stage , then some improvements could be expected for higher fs at 192khz but not on all materials ime. But it require some pretty good clock and this can be a very big economic investissment for little final gain.
Think about F1 or Bikes: up to a point it isn't costly to reduce weight then once the treshold is reached cost increase exponentially for each gramms...
Last edited:
To say it blunt and honest for once; I actually don't.
I just really don't understand the whole approach at all.
Seems to be common on forums and DIY'ers.....
Spending most energy and time into things that are least important.
Best way to fail your exam or thesis of any kind.
Also the best way to get any boss angry for wasting his time and money.
Start to learn to think in top-down approach.
Recognize what elements are most important.
Recognize proper literate and articles, instead of 3rd party magazine stories (often from companies themselves)
Most important, read these books from start till end:
- Loudspeaker Handbook by John Eargle
- Loudspeaker and Headphone Handbook by John Borwick
- Acoustics: Sound Fields and Transducers by Tim Mellow and Leo Beranek
- Sound Reproduction by Floyd Toole
and some psycho-acoustics books as well.
(can't think of any titles atm)
some of them can be found easily
Yes, I am aware it sounds very grumpy, well so be it.....
If you want to understand thinks, you have to do a lot more than hanging around on forums
This could be a straw man, lets see....
Which aspect are you suggesting that I am discussing, in particular, that is least important. I hope it isn't GD and Timbre. Cause you'd be very very wrong. If so, just say its not important to you.
Thats only true if you haven't already studied the material that is going to get you a passing grade...an A even....Only the people who have passion for the discipline are going to put time into the more mundane or subtle parts....I guess we should consider you not among that group. And thats ok....
This I agree too....but in the meant time and the between time, we converse to generate ideas, keep accurate information floating, keep our philosophy sharp, etc...
Last edited:
Yes!
That as well.
Get your hands dirty, stand with your feet deep into the clay
Seen to many people "discussing" for months about problems.
Yet the problem was solved within half a day by actually DOING it, and NON of all the fancy suggestions before were even taken into consideration anymore.
The irony and comedy....
Last edited:
I would rather see a top-down understanding first before I am gonna answer any questions at all.
Otherwise it will guaranteed a never ending story again and again and again.
Second, are you familiar with the books I mentioned?
I don't really care if you're ok with me, I am just trying to give well meant advice.
I have more then enough experience in coaching interns and such.
This approach won't give you a passing grade.
Like I said, it won't you even pass the exam.
Last edited:
I'm not sure if there are any questions at this time... I've mastered Group Delay from the perspective I like to view it from....ie, start up transient....I've been able to see how frequency modulation might be the source of the distortion of the amplitude...I've made the connection between the frequency modulation and the Harmonics generated by the fundamental, carrier wave...
Insignificant details as you describe them.
Insignificant details as you describe them.
I just really don't understand the whole approach at all.
Seems to be common on forums and DIY'ers.....
Spending most energy and time into things that are least important.
Which begs the question: "Which things are most important?"
You won't get a consensus answer to that question, maybe there isn't one. I doubt there is. What many here struggle with is the wide range of answers that one gets to the above. How does a novice sort that out? (We can't all be experts.)
I see this thread as doing a little of the "sorting out". If so, then it's worth it.
Yes you will and there is.
There is very clear and obviously a good understanding of things that are a lot more significant than other things.
That has been known for many years by now.
How does a novice sort that out?
I gave four very good reads on the subject, plus an additional suggestion about psycho-acoustics.
Even asked if the person in question was familiar with those reads.
If you doubt about it, I would suggest freshening up the mind.
I do it on a regular basis, sometimes amazed about things that have been there for many many years and often forgotten by many people.
A much more interesting question is why people forget these things.
Although I am afraid it's a very obvious and simple answer.
What is your purpose here then, do you patrol the internet to make sure people have read suggested material before engaging in conversation and the passing of ideas....
The books you suggested, I am not familiar with, but because you've shared them, I may take part.
Stick to sharing ideas that add to thread, not those that take away.
"If you doubt about it, I would suggest freshening up the mind.
I do it on a regular basis, sometimes amazed about things that have been there for many many years and often forgotten by many people." - this thread inspires that, I believe.
All in all, its good conversation, there's no one being forced to participate.
The books you suggested, I am not familiar with, but because you've shared them, I may take part.
Stick to sharing ideas that add to thread, not those that take away.
"If you doubt about it, I would suggest freshening up the mind.
I do it on a regular basis, sometimes amazed about things that have been there for many many years and often forgotten by many people." - this thread inspires that, I believe.
All in all, its good conversation, there's no one being forced to participate.
Last edited: