A good reference
https://www.mojo-audio.com/blog/dsd-vs-pcm-myth-vs-truth/
https://www.mojo-audio.com/blog/dsd-vs-pcm-myth-vs-truth/
32 bit 768khz is purely marketing. It's not real values.
I'm not pushing hires. However the reason it isn't needed is not because there are no DACs that can perform with those formats.
And yes, I most definitely would say 32 bit 784 khz is pure marketing. There is an edge case to be made for 96 khz. I don't see one at all for more than that for music use. 96/16 with noise shaped dither would give you all you can make use of down to about -120 db.
I'm not pushing hires. However the reason it isn't needed is not because there are no DACs that can perform with those formats.
And yes, I most definitely would say 32 bit 784 khz is pure marketing. There is an edge case to be made for 96 khz. I don't see one at all for more than that for music use. 96/16 with noise shaped dither would give you all you can make use of down to about -120 db.
I had the same issue. I used to put two in series. One position just connected the second one straight thru. So that gave me 23 positions.
I later snagged some milspec silver contact 36 position switches at a ham show. I never used them.
I ended up basically putting the resistors in a ladder configuration similar to a R2R ladder DAC. I only used 7. So I had 128 positions. I put toggle switches in and you could adjust with excellent precision with only 7 switches. It was surprising how quickly the settings became second nature though at first it seemed chaotic.
I read this in astonishment. I have owned a Sony Hap S1 since 2014 connected to LS3/5as in my living room for a long time. I haven’t ever used the headphone output. But to say this can’t resolve CD quality, let alone hi res audio is just plain wrong. You can clearly hear the quality difference between old fashioned mpeg, red book, flac, WAV and dsd. Clearly...
You can clearly hear the quality difference between old fashioned mpeg, red book, flac, WAV and dsd. Clearly...
Are there tests to compare transients of dacs?For audio reproduction (playback) you are (finally) half correct about something ...
The bottom 12 bits or so will drown in noise for sure when converted to analog.
A 300kHz audio bandwidth will be a real value but 'somewhat' overkill for home entertainment.
I would not be surprised if 'golden eared' folks will step up an claim audible superiority over say 384/24 ... because of the transients for instance
One last reply for today, have a look at this from your recommended paper, which I had in mind in the above. The oversampling math seems to reconstruct the clipped original signal and results in a "true peak" reading...anyway tomorrow I read that again entirely and now I enjoy the rest of the "Tatort" TV movie...
View attachment 27435
Are there tests to compare transients of dacs?
How is it possible to know that the transient of the records in dacs are respected. Is it hearable in timbre?
I guess that was the goal of mqa.
With the exception perhaps of Ray's spoon tapping and some castanets.
I’m afraid I doubt it.After the last days of the discussion, this would be my best guess as well. From my technical perspective all that discussion wouldn´t have come up, if Philips/Sony would have waited a bit and moved into the market with 64KHz/18bits...
No idea. Just mqa was made for having same filter as adc and keep the transient unchanged. Don't know if it makes any difference.There are plots showing how DACs respond to illegal signals that do not exist in audio files.
I really recommend you analyze transients in music pieces and you will find the transients you hear as transients are spread out over many samples and thus well below Nyquist, even at 44/16 and don't have any risetimes anywhere near nyquist at all *.
DAC's have no trouble reproducing these 'transients' in music.
Do you have any evidence (other than anecdotal and sighted) pointing towards this ?
With the exception perhaps of Ray's spoon tapping and some castanets.
Did you know that PCM was made to have the same filter on both ends too. And it really works well. Then various people starting using various other filters on the DAC end to change the sound or try to, and saying it was better. Mostly it is different, and not quite as good, or accurate etc.No idea. Just mqa was made for having same filter as adc and keep the transient unchanged. Don't know if it makes any difference.
Did you know that PCM was made to have the same filter on both ends too. And it really works well. Then various people starting using various other filters on the DAC end to change the sound or try to, and saying it was better. Mostly it is different, and not quite as good, or accurate etc.
I've posted some 176 khz sampled cymbal crashes recorded with wide bandwidth microphones, and like you are being told, something like that which you think is a steep transient isn't so steep. Well within CD to record. It builds over several samples as the metal cymbal having been struck ramps up to a resonance, and then decays.
Mqa claims that in old digital records adc had different filters. Then mqa say to the dac wich filter is adapted so that the dac use the same as the adc.Did you know that PCM was made to have the same filter on both ends too. And it really works well. Then various people starting using various other filters on the DAC end to change the sound or try to, and saying it was better. Mostly it is different, and not quite as good, or accurate etc.
I've posted some 176 khz sampled cymbal crashes recorded with wide bandwidth microphones, and like you are being told, something like that which you think is a steep transient isn't so steep. Well within CD to record. It builds over several samples as the metal cymbal having been struck ramps up to a resonance, and then decays.