The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Tags: ,

Is there a remote possibility of a live DSD/PCM comparison?
Old 22nd June 2004
  #31
Gear Nut
 
Inky Goddess's Avatar
 

kevin, i think nika was speaking more to me than to the AE's here. i'm not an AE, i never pretended to be an AE, and i believe nika knows this; hence, i might need listening lessons. fair enough.

all i'm trying to do here is something nice for a bunch of people i don't even know. i'm that kind of person. my job is public relations and i really enjoy it. i would love to meet you all and speak to you all, if you feel like speaking to me. if not, don't speak to me; just enjoy the company of your colleagues, the A/B test, the music and the catering and other refreshments. i hope you benefit from getting your hands on this equipment, with the rep right there to answer all your questions. these are the guys you can really argue with, and then decide for yourself whether or not they're spoonfeeding bull**** to the masses.

this is also going to be mostly-free* for you guys, as long as you can get yourselves there.

so i wonder, why am i being attacked and dissed...is nice not an acceptable behavior for a gearslut? is it too outside-the-box?

nika, truly, i appreciate you and mean you no offense. it's just that The Superior Ones follow you everywhere because you really know how to play them like cheap fiddles without them realizing it, and you even have them begging for more, bless your heart. we mere mortals are terrified in their presence. for this reason i ask all parties embroiled in it to continue the pyramix debate in the pyramix etc thread. this technically-challenged thread is collecting suggestions, not debating them. as i posted last time, "ultimately i'm going to give the suggestions to the company reps that provide the equipment and let them use whatever they want," so you see, debating each other's suggestions is futile and a sublime waste of your time.

nika, thanks for your patience and understanding. i hope you can find a way to new york for this event, if i can make it happen.

ted, i'm going to have the recording and subsequent events begin early enough to ensure that they precede the opening of the bar. the companies providing gear will probably insist on a no-drinks policy near the gear. if anybody suffers an alcohol-induced lapse of perception during the A/B test, it'll be their own fault. but when we're done with all the business, let the good times roll!

*=BYOB
Old 22nd June 2004
  #32
Gear Nut
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kevinc
O.K. So what your saying right here is that the system you`ve been talking about (DSD) which is according to you flawed in some way can`t be tested against something like a Lavry or Prism converter. Converters which are thought of around here as being pretty damn good and extremey expensive.

Again, I am making a case that if you really want to test the format to see if one is inherently better than the other then the converters used need to be the full potential of what PCM converters are capable of and what DSD converters are capable of, no? So if there is any sort of audible flaw in the Lavry's, for example, then those are an inadequate converter to test the formats with. They are certainly capable of giving you some sort of meter of the state of the current technology. Using those can tell you, for example, that perhaps DSD is better than PCM - at least as it seems to be readily available. But you will not be able to walk out of the test and say, ipso facto, that DSD is better than PCM. The statement is simply too broad if you choose a specific converter that adds a new set of variables to the listening test.

How is that a fair test ?

Again, keep your eye on what you are really testing. Are you really testing the format or are you testing specific implementations? Is DSD really better than PCM or is it only better than we've been able to make PCM so far? The answer to those questions tells us completely different things about the direction in which we should take the industry.

If it beats out the Lavrys and DCS and whatever other converter on the market currently you'd have to be an idiot to sit there and say they aren't on to something.

Totally agreed.

Nika.
Old 22nd June 2004
  #33
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally posted by kevinc
Another load of crap.

Your saying that an experienced AE or ME wouldn`t have the ear to tell whether one format is capable of giving them a more accurate listening experiance than another.

You need training for that ?

You mean if I listen to the 2 and decide I like DSD better it`s because I haven`t trained my ears to hear the flaws in the 2 systems. That`s absolutely rediculous.

If it sounds better to me IT SOUNDS BETTER TO ME. Period.
Let's say that some system - we'll call it ABC - has a known flaw in that any signal put in at exactly 5kHz in a very narrow band comes out phase shifted by 10 degrees, but only within that narrow band. Or let's say that the system puts out a distortion signal at -80dB at 60Hz whenever it is fed a very specific type of signal. These errors may not show up on typical listening tests with broadband music playing into the system. They may also not show up with various test signals. But they may show up 6 months from now on a record you are mixing, just as it's getting ready to go to press.

For these reasons, when testing a system it is necessary to know its theoretical flaws and come up with specific test signals to expose those so that the listeners can be aware of the problems prior to the test. This is to accommodate the fact that we can't listen to ALL music through the system during a test. A test is a short time evaluation of a long term use. We test a system for an hour, a day, a week, a month, whatever, and we plan on using it for some form of longevity. In order to make ourselves aware of all of the potential problems with the equipment, and to short-circuit future problems, when we do ABX tests or any other rigorous testing, we train the listeners to listen for certain things, so that as they surface in listening tests at subtle levels the listeners can be more aware of them.

Bob Katz often mentions that when he wants to check the audible characteristic of a component (a resistor, an opamp, whatever) he puts ten together in series to make its sonic signature very obvious. Then, when he goes back to one he is more aware of what he is listening for. Without doing this Bob might determine an opamp has no audible effect simply because the music didn't expose the effect in a way he was listening for and inia way that the music directly exposed. It is not to say, however, that the music won't expose it at some point, and he has to be aware of that.

So if you are going to test formats you should find out the objections to each, exaggerate the effects and get accustomed to what they are so that on playback you can be more aware of whether or not those issues surface in practical situations. Get an exaggerated example of the "preripple" everyone talks about. Get an exaggerated example of phase shift that people talk about with PCM. And get an exaggerated example of the birdies and warbling people complain about with DSD.

Of course, this is all dependent upon this somehow being a scientific test. If it is only going to be a loose test that essentially compares converters then these details are insignificant. I only brought these issues up if the goal is truly to compare formats

Nika.
Old 22nd June 2004
  #34
Nika, do you rigorously test everything like this before you put it in your recording chain? If so, how do you actually ever get around to recording anything?

There comes a point where you have to trust what your ears tell you, imo.
Old 22nd June 2004
  #35
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Brad Blackwood
Nika, do you rigorously test everything like this before you put it in your recording chain? If so, how do you actually ever get around to recording anything?
It's the difference between testing box that costs a few bucks that I can sell at any time - and testing a format to which we change all music recording and delivery.

Again, so long as the conclusions are properly stated it doesn't really matter.

Nika.
Old 22nd June 2004
  #36
Quote:
Originally posted by Nika Aldrich
It's the difference between testing box that costs a few bucks that I can sell at any time - and testing a format to which we change all music recording and delivery.
I don't understand this - are you saying it's about the money?

I don't see it being any more important than anything else in the chain. if it sounds good/appropriate, use it. if not, don't. Your choice of recording format isn't gonna change the sound nearly as much as what mic you select and how you place it...
Old 22nd June 2004
  #37
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Brad Blackwood
I don't understand this - are you saying it's about the money?

I don't see it being any more important than anything else in the chain. if it sounds good/appropriate, use it. if not, don't. Your choice of recording format isn't gonna change the sound nearly as much as what mic you select and how you place it...
DSD is more than a choice in recording format, though. I suppose it is possible you could use it as that and then downsample to a distributable sample rate - at which point I assume this downsampling process would be a part of any viable test?

Other than the prospects of downsampling to 44.1, a decision to record DSD is virtually a decision to release and archive as DSD, and therefore other decisions need to be taken into regard - from my perspective.

Nika.
Old 22nd June 2004
  #38
Gear Nut
 
Inky Goddess's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Brad Blackwood
Your choice of recording format isn't gonna change the sound nearly as much as what mic you select and how you place it...
you are so on the money, brad.

anybody wanna suggest mics for the A/B? we'll be recording rock music with real instruments, more than likely. who would you like to see setting them up?
Old 22nd June 2004
  #39
Lives for gear
 
Ted Nightshade's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by loudist
Why wouldn't you use a current picture when putting a website together in 2002?
Odd.

VERY suspicious! Extremely disturbing... you got something to hide, Nika, or WHAT?!

That's downright unAmerican, is what it is... are you SURE all your papers are in order?
Old 23rd June 2004
  #40
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally posted by loudist

Lets take ambience...
Fast early reflection ambience phase angles change so rapidly that when sampled and played back at 44.1 it is ignored by the ear until the changing phase angles slow enough that the samplerate can reproduce the phase information in a way that ear can finally make sense of it.
This is a function of the samplerate frequency, period.
Your Sony Whatchamacallits cannot get over this issue of early ambient 'pixellation' (for want of a better term).
So output the audio can never be the same as input... never!!!
Are you actually interested in having a conversation about phase distortion at various sample frequencies or are you more interested in bickering, ad hominem attacks, and public ridicule? If the former I would be happy to discuss this matter with you. If the latter I am most definitely not interested.

Let me know. In the meantime, 44.1kS/s sample rates have phase accuracy to within 2 nanoseconds, exceeding the ear's sensitivity to interaural timing cues by a factor of about 1000.

Nika.
Old 23rd June 2004
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Ted Nightshade's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Nika Aldrich

44.1kS/s sample rates have phase accuracy to within 2 nanoseconds, exceeding the ear's sensitivity to interaural timing cues by a factor of about 1000.

Nika.
I understand that Paul Frindle was saying at least some implementations can do this (he wasn't as specific as 2 nanoseconds, just said "nanoseconds", but how many really do? Would it be more accurate to say, 44.1kS/s sample rates can achieve this, properly implemented? I've heard some damned sloppy timing out of some pretty serious PCM converters... (Cranesong HEDD would be one)
Old 23rd June 2004
  #42
Gear Nut
 
Inky Goddess's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Nika Aldrich
Are you actually interested in having a conversation about phase distortion at various sample frequencies or are you more interested in bickering, ad hominem attacks, and public ridicule?
it seems that the cat is growing tired of toying with its mouse. heh
Old 23rd June 2004
  #43
Lives for gear
 
djui5's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Inky Goddess
you are so on the money, brad.

anybody wanna suggest mics for the A/B? we'll be recording rock music with real instruments, more than likely. who would you like to see setting them up?
What kinda rock?...vintage, hard rock, polished pop/rock, rap/rock (please say no)......
Old 23rd June 2004
  #44
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Ted Nightshade
I understand that Paul Frindle was saying at least some implementations can do this (he wasn't as specific as 2 nanoseconds, just said "nanoseconds", but how many really do? Would it be more accurate to say, 44.1kS/s sample rates can achieve this, properly implemented? I've heard some damned sloppy timing out of some pretty serious PCM converters... (Cranesong HEDD would be one)
The actual answer is that the phase correlation fluctuates +/-2ns with variations distributed in a Gaussian curve centered around 0ns phase shift.

The limiting factor of the phase of the converters is one of two things. First, it is poor filtering. As we've discussed before, proper implementation takes a combination of linear phase digital filters and an analog filter (that engenders phase shift at minimal levels). The best thing to do is to accommodate for some of the phase shift in the analog filter through making the digital filter a phase-shifting filter the other way. In other words, the digital filter is no longer phase-linear, but is actually phase backwards to a small degree! This helps maintain absolute phase between the combination of the two filters. This is a problem with higher sample rate converters just like it is in lower rate converters.

The other limiting factor of the phase is the analog section. 2ns timing variation is akin to a small fraction of a degree of phase shift at 20kHz. The accuracy of the analog equipment must be quite stellar to handle this degree of accuracy. In reality, analog equipment tolerances, even in Paul's converters, cannot come anywhere close to this amount. Fortunately this number is again 1000 times the accuracy needed for human needs (around 2us - not 2ns).

The issue is that the 2ns number is the limiting factor of the format, and changing the format to improve that number is unnecessary, especially if the limiting factors - being the analog sections - far exceed the errors that exist in the format inherently, and are format independent.

Nika.
Old 23rd June 2004
  #45
Lives for gear
 
Ted Nightshade's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Nika Aldrich


The issue is that the 2ns number is the limiting factor of the format, and changing the format to improve that number is unnecessary, especially if the limiting factors - being the analog sections - far exceed the errors that exist in the format inherently, and are format independent.

Nika.
Right, gotcha. Thanks!
Old 23rd June 2004
  #46
High End Moderator
 
mwagener's Avatar
Quote:
Originally posted by djui5
What kinda rock?...vintage, hard rock, polished pop/rock, rap/rock (please say no)......
I vote for GLEAMO heh heh heh
Old 23rd June 2004
  #47
Gear Nut
 
Inky Goddess's Avatar
 

dj, everyone, i can't say what kind of rock yet, because before i approach musicians i need to make sure this is actually going to happen. let's just say i'm going to call a bunch of friends and put together your basic classic rock/blues quartet or quintet, plus a lead singer, so we can isolate the lead vocal. instruments: one or two guitars, a bass guitar, drums and piano, preferably upright, but maybe a fender rhodes, which is a little easier to cart around. either that, or recruit a hungry band worthy of the project. no electronic instruments (except maybe a synth if the keyboardist pitches a bitch). think along these lines when you make your suggestions. thanks!

before anybody makes any disparaging remarks: the friends i'll be calling are all pros and are all older than me. some have been playing their respective instruments as long as i've been alive. one friend i have in mind is currently in a band that's on the charts in europe. another owns a recording studio in upstate new york, and in fact owned the eight-track studio i worked in way back when. fear not; the band will definitely not be a garage band.
Old 23rd June 2004
  #48
Lives for gear
 
Jose Mrochek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Inky Goddess
jose, liquid cocaine tastes like ****, and i won't give you the recipe for a ****ty tasting drink. make an oatmeal cookie instead: any glass 3/4 full of bailey's, fill almost to the top with goldschlager, and then top it off with a float of jaegermeister & stir. ice is very optional. it tastes yummy, just like an oatmeal cookie.


Inky, I know it's not the best tasting drink in the world. But I'm not the kind of guy who drinks for pleasure, I drink to get buzzed. And 3 years ago when I lived in Orlando, I would go to a club have a liquid cocaine shot.. and was ready to do the moves on any girl. Great effect on me. I miss that, and in south america... or at least where I live now they have no idea what it is... that's why I asked you. Thanks for the other recipe, though heh
Old 24th June 2004
  #49
Lives for gear
 
djui5's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by mwagener
I vote for GLEAMO heh heh heh
That's hillarious!!!!


Someone call slips...we'll have him mix it.
Old 24th June 2004
  #50
Lives for gear
 
djui5's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jose Mrochek

And 3 years ago when I lived in Orlando, I would go to a club have a liquid cocaine shot..
What clubs?
Old 25th June 2004
  #51
Lives for gear
 
Jose Mrochek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by djui5
What clubs?

ICON!! downtown, go in the club get a shot from the cute bartender girl upstairs, and was ready for anything!
Old 25th June 2004
  #52
Lives for gear
 
djui5's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jose Mrochek
ICON!! downtown, go in the club get a shot from the cute bartender girl upstairs, and was ready for anything!

Ha...that was my fav club. I used to date one of the bartenders...Christine......she was cool.

I loved that place.
Old 25th June 2004
  #53
Lives for gear
 
Jose Mrochek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by djui5
Ha...that was my fav club. I used to date one of the bartenders...Christine......she was cool.

I loved that place.

My respect to you Randy, I don't remember names.. but I sure remember some where goddesses, like inky heh
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump