boxerfan88
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2018
- Messages
- 401
- Likes
- 444
The gain adjustment in itself is “adulterating” the original signal…
so when you turn the volume up or down, you're adulterating the signal? I'd like to see you provide evidence of this effect ...The gain adjustment in itself is “adulterating” the original signal…
so when you turn the volume up or down, you're adulterating the signal? I'd like to see you provide evidence of this effect ...
This is absolutely not true. You've made these figures up and that's not what happens.Let's focus on the digital side, inside foobar.
1. Assume a music track sample -- original signal sample value is +0.5 FS (full scale).
2. Assume the replaygain is -1dB -- which equates to 0.891.; and preamp gain is 0dB which equates to 1.
3. Foobar will calculate the -- output signal sample value is +0.5FS * 0.891 * 1 = +0.4455FS.
4. Foobar will output the "adulterated" sample value of +0.4455FS to the DAC.
5. This is repeated for every sample in the music track.
We can see that original sample of +0.5FS has now been changed to +0.4455FS.
The sample sent to the DAC is not the same as the original sample from the music file, the signal has been "adulterated".
QED.
This thread may help you better understand what goes on inside foobar relating to replaygain & preamp.
Per post #19, disabling foobar replaygain & no preamp & no other DSP running will keep the signal "unadulterated".
Whatever sample value that came from the music track will be sent to the DAC untouched.
This is absolutely not true. You've made these figures up and that's not what happens.
I challenge you to prove any of this.
I'm off to Hydrogen Audio to see what they say about your 'theory'. This should be fun.
This is absolutely not true. You've made these figures up and that's not what happens.
I challenge you to prove any of this.
Ok, first off, if the "original signal is 0.5 dBFS and you apply replaygain -1 dB, you will get -0.5 dBFS.", shouldn't you? Furthermore no samples are changed, the signal level is being increased or decreased in its entirety. This is the same as any digital volume controlled signal received by a DAC isn't it?Please do.
I am happy to be proven wrong and I’ll get corrected, or you’ll get educated. Win-win.
I repeat what I have shared: applying replaygain adjustment on a track to be played will definitely change the sample value from the original sample value prior to output to DAC.
By this definition anyone without their volume control at max is adulterating the signal. Mmmmmmkayyyyy.....The gain adjustment in itself is “adulterating” the original signal…
But for spreading FUD it works pretty wellIf one should call this change "adulterating" is another thing.
He wrote 0.5 FS, so he could mean half FS, so about -6 dBFS.Ok, first off, if the "original signal is 0.5 dBFS and you apply replaygain -1 dB, you will get -0.5 dBFS.", shouldn't you?
And then, a possibly digital volume control in DAC will do the same "adulteration" as replay gain would have done.Whatever sample value that came from the music track will be sent to the DAC untouched.
Perhaps stating the very obvious but be it volume control, replaygain or any other type of DSP, by design it alters the samples otherwise it won't work.
If one should call this change "adulterating" is another thing. It suggest that DSP is wrong, evil, etc. so a bit silly moral judgement imho.
Ok, first off, if the "original signal is 0.5 dBFS and you apply replaygain -1 dB, you will get -0.5 dBFS.", shouldn't you?
Furthermore no samples are changed, the signal level is being increased or decreased in its entirety.
By this definition anyone without their volume control at max is adulterating the signal. Mmmmmmkayyyyy.....
But for spreading FUD it works pretty well
He wrote 0.5 FS, so he could mean half FS, so about -6 dBFS.
And then, a possibly digital volume control in DAC will do the same "adulteration" as replay gain would have done.
noun: adulteration;
diction matters
- the action of making something poorer in quality by the addition of another substance.
Doubling down on a losing hand, and in public? Well it's up to you, I made my point, it's not my fault if you can't learn from the obvious.
Self-assuredness goeth before the fall, just saying.
I'm guessing you don't like Foobar2000? Anyways, I clearly made my point and I'm done wasting time on a non-issue brought up by someone with a grudge.
Thanks.
Language is revealing ... you chose the wrong word, there's no shame in admitting one has made a mistake. As well, is this a case of needing to get in The Last Word? :~)