• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is. It is there on the bottom right of the diagram. I think this exemplifies well why you are not getting a lot of affection from the forum. You are saying should there not be a low pass filter on the DAC and the diagram you attached to the same post shows a low pass filter on the DAC. If you could spend a minute thinking about your own question rather than seemingly posting the first thing that came to your mind to the forum (and a more descriptive subject wouldn't hurt either) you would get a lot more traction in my experience.

I did not read his response as saying there was not a LPF, but as asking "isn't there a LPF on my DAC, given this picture?" granted, the sentence was not grammatical, but I that's how I interpreted it. The previous poster was positing a problem if his DAC did not have a LPF.
 
I did not read his response as saying there was not a LPF, but as asking "isn't there a LPF on my DAC, given this picture?" granted, the sentence was not grammatical, but I that's how I interpreted it. The previous poster was positing a problem if his DAC did not have a LPF.
Yes you might be right. In any case, I've deleted the post as I don't want to be involved in this topic :)
 
Sorry to be blunt... but do we really need another DSD thread?



JSmith
 
Sorry to be blunt... but do we really need another DSD thread?

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-superior-or-just-the-audio-file-du-jour.534/


JSmith
Got it. DSD = "Don't Submit Dat" again in ASR...
 
"Don't Submit Dat"
I'll pay that... :cool: Just search for threads before starting new ones when possible. Otherwise we end up with the information and discussion spread over too many threads, which can make it difficult for people to find the info required. As you can imagine, DSD has been discussed ad-nauseam here.

You may find this a decent read as well;


JSmith
 
Is DSD harmful for tweeters & amps?

No, simply because the HF energy to a speaker is
A: too low in level compared to the actual signal (-50dB so effectively uW of noise compared to Watts of music power)
B: Volume pot position (listening level) dependent. (the lower the volume setting the less noise too)
C: The impedance rises as ultrasonic frequencies and thus the current drops
D: Any decent DAC will have some attenuation of the ultrasonic noise spectrum.

DSD64 would be the 'worst' of them, noise spectrum of DSD256 is shifted so far upwards it will be filtered anyway.

Nothing to worry about as some others already mentioned. Other respondents just joke about it and consider that people do not complain of failed tweeters let alone failed amps because they started listening to DSD instead of PCM.
 
Last edited:
No, simply because the HF energy is
A: too low in level
B: Volume pot dependent
C: The impedance rises as ultrasonic frequencies and thus the current drops
D: Any decent DAC will have some attenuation of the ultrasonic noise spectrum.

DSD64 would be the 'worst' of them, noise spectrum of DSD256 is shifted so far upwards it will be filtered anyway.

Nothing to worry about as some others already mentioned. Other respondents just joke about it and consider that people do not complain of failed tweeters let alone failed amps because they started listening to DSD instead of PCM.
That's really helpful. Thank you... :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom