Gearslutz.com - View Single Post - The plights of AD / DA "re-conversion"

Kiwiburger · 19th June 2006

My 2 cents:

The degredation of d/a & a/d is nothing compared to bouncing to and from mag tape. And yet some of the best sounding records of all time had numerous tape bounces. I actually think this can give depth, that is missing from non-bounced digital stuff.

A good analogy is comparing tape or analog delays with digital delays. Most people much prefer the degraded sound of tape or analog delays. I believe this is because acoustic sound degrades in air - the further away, the more degraded. And therefore delays or distant sounds are more natural when allowed to degrade.

I also think that digital reverb (which is a whole bunch of delays) also benefits from having the sharp edges dulled by some smeary analog circuitry.

So for 'layered' send effects, especially with a time component that gives the pschoacoustic illusion of distance, it's probably very beneficial that the d/a & a/d process knocks off some transients.

Another important thing to think about is the fact that not all digital audio waveforms as we see them on the screen are valid representations of a continuous acoustic waveforms. Especially if any processing has occurred. The D/A converter will convert the data into an actual analog waveform - which is a very different thing. In the process, it can be expected to smooth out the waveform and, it's little wonder that when this is re-digitised by the A/D, it will appear slightly different on our screens. But different may actually sound better.

I'm also of the opinion that most converters sound worse when the signal is too hot or approaching 0dBFS. (I know other people don't believe this - it does depend on the converters you have). But it seems to me that few people are using Lavry Gold or similar high end converters for this out-of-box experience. The fact that better converters exist means that my Lucid and Benchmark converters aren't quite as good, and therefore there should be audible and visible differences in the waveforms.

I have no doubts that ITB digital streams offer the least change in a signal. But change can be good.

19th June 2006	#12
Kiwiburger Lives for gear Joined: Feb 2006 Posts: 4,075	My 2 cents: The degredation of d/a & a/d is nothing compared to bouncing to and from mag tape. And yet some of the best sounding records of all time had numerous tape bounces. I actually think this can give depth, that is missing from non-bounced digital stuff. A good analogy is comparing tape or analog delays with digital delays. Most people much prefer the degraded sound of tape or analog delays. I believe this is because acoustic sound degrades in air - the further away, the more degraded. And therefore delays or distant sounds are more natural when allowed to degrade. I also think that digital reverb (which is a whole bunch of delays) also benefits from having the sharp edges dulled by some smeary analog circuitry. So for 'layered' send effects, especially with a time component that gives the pschoacoustic illusion of distance, it's probably very beneficial that the d/a & a/d process knocks off some transients. Another important thing to think about is the fact that not all digital audio waveforms as we see them on the screen are valid representations of a continuous acoustic waveforms. Especially if any processing has occurred. The D/A converter will convert the data into an actual analog waveform - which is a very different thing. In the process, it can be expected to smooth out the waveform and, it's little wonder that when this is re-digitised by the A/D, it will appear slightly different on our screens. But different may actually sound better. I'm also of the opinion that most converters sound worse when the signal is too hot or approaching 0dBFS. (I know other people don't believe this - it does depend on the converters you have). But it seems to me that few people are using Lavry Gold or similar high end converters for this out-of-box experience. The fact that better converters exist means that my Lucid and Benchmark converters aren't quite as good, and therefore there should be audible and visible differences in the waveforms. I have no doubts that ITB digital streams offer the least change in a signal. But change can be good.