The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
if higher sample rate doesnt matter then why .... Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 23rd September 2011
  #631
Lives for gear
 
dcollins's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveDaveDave View Post
So, I have a question about jitter measurement - think I should start a new thread for it?

<ducking/>
Sure. I've been doing my own here and learning a lot.


DC
Old 23rd September 2011
  #632
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
How can we take jitter seriously in a universe where some particles can travel faster than the speed of light?
dont believe everything you read

in my chemE class in the 60s
we saw an electron go faster than light

THIS IS OLD NEWS

lots of things can go faster than light IN A MEDIUM

that neutrino was in earths atmosphere
and there are experimental measurement errors too

dont count einstein out yet

not until the 248 dimensional model is finished
Old 23rd September 2011
  #633
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Let me stop you right there. :-)

All these converters are oversampling converters and take a voltage measurement 6,144,000 times a second. That happens whether the base rate of the converter is set to 48Khz, 96Khz, or 192Khz. (5,644,800 times per second for sample rates of 44.1/88.2/176,4Khz)

This completely invalidates the argument for 192Khz sample rates.

Alistair
nonsense
a new converter design would oversample still higher and sample higher than 192
and get better results

you cant use existing gear as proof of anything
Old 23rd September 2011
  #634
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Syncamorea View Post
I will refer you to industry publications in the early 80's that made this claim for the compact disc:

"Perfect sound forever"
close enough for govt work

at least until todays idiots equated louder with better
and started destroying the quality

read lunds paper on 0dBFS++ as he calls it
and the problems with being too hot in the various parts of teh signal path
Old 23rd September 2011
  #635
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Syncamorea View Post
There have been some pretty exciting developments in high speed analog and digital devices in the last decade. I'm hoping they have an impact on A/D/As for audio, and there's no reason they wouldn't other than cost of development or maybe that industry leaders think current devices are good enough (as an excuse to delay spending the development bucks).
people will continue to use existing chips as they are cheap

eventually someone will build much better ones
and some high end box will use them

and eventually they will trickle down to consumers
in 10-20 years or so
Old 23rd September 2011
  #636
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doug hazelrigg View Post
Taking a voltage measurement 192,000 times a second... to paraphrase Dirty Harry: "An ADC has GOT to know it's limitations!"

It takes a discrete amount of time for an op amp, etc to undergo a change in voltage -- it doesn't happen instantaneously... there's a duration of rise and fall, etc. Then, given the device's physical parameters -- size, resistance, design quality, material, it's going to have certain other limitations, a fixed (more or less) number of atoms that all behave according to laws. Again, these limitations have nothing to do with "the current state of technology" or "production quality/costs" but everything to do with the fundamental laws of physics that can't be violated... ever

I know next to nothing about tech
, but I assume that the falling precision of a ADC as one increases the rate can actually be predicted, based on the properties of whatever is doing the measuring, as well as incorporating whatever variables apply, especially the nature of what is being measured, as well as how frequently it's being measured
you should not ASSume anything

there is lots of room to do things faster better
but maybe not cheaper

your assumptions about shortcomings are not going to hit us for a long long long time
Old 23rd September 2011
  #637
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins View Post
What changes would you recommend to greatly improve today's designs?

Cost-no-object.
DC
a feature that executes anybody who tries to ever push any signal over -12dBFS at any point in the signal chain.
if any sample ever touched 0dBFS they would be flogged and tortured first.

other than that we would need to change many things to keep them all in balance. but just more headroom in the d/a to help overcome the nonsense the louder is better bunch does in the digital domain would be a start.
Old 23rd September 2011
  #638
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doug hazelrigg View Post
But see, I think THAT'S not quite true... improved tech helps up to a point, but then one hits something a ceiling due to physical law and properties of matter. A convertor, in all of it's components -- hardware, firmware, everything -- is still a physical machine with real-world limitations that will never be overcome

that ceiling is nowhere near being hit

and new technology will move it still higher again in the future

the issue is money and will
and as long as idiots destroy the signal in the digital domain by trying to make it louder instead of better there is no point in improving other things.

read lunds paper

he is saying pretty much what i have said that many slutz say is totally wron g

DISTORTION TO THE PEOPLE
Thomas Lund
Program Manager
[email protected]
TC Electronic A/S, Denmark
Old 23rd September 2011
  #639
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doug hazelrigg View Post
Okay. But (and I'm holding on here for dear life like someone else we know ) am I not correct in ASSerting that as the sampling element operates faster and faster, past a certain threshold, each measurement of voltage becomes increasingly less accurate? I mean, I'm no physicist or engineer, but I think it just has to. No?

not really
we are nowhere near that situation

but in theory if you push far enough you would be right
be are nowhere near that point yet
Old 23rd September 2011
  #640
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins View Post
Sure. I've been doing my own here and learning a lot.


DC
definitely start a new thread for a related aspect
easier to find and get meaningful thread

too much in one thread is counterproductive
Old 23rd September 2011
  #641
Lives for gear
 
DaveUK's Avatar
Hehxatly!
Old 23rd September 2011
  #642
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldeanalogueguy View Post
a feature that executes anybody who tries to ever push any signal over -12dBFS at any point in the signal chain.
Yup.

I've often though that if we actually had a system whereby you couldn't go over -12 RMS that'd be awesome. UNLIMITED music would be punchier and louder than the flat lined stuff. Wouldn't that be something!
Old 23rd September 2011
  #643
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldeanalogueguy View Post
read lunds paper

he is saying pretty much what i have said that many slutz say is totally wron g

DISTORTION TO THE PEOPLE
Thomas Lund
Hate to say it but you do know that paper fundamentally disagrees with most of your points? Inter sample peaks? Digital/analogue correlation? Reference levels against digital values? Mind you - other points are perfectly matched.....
Old 23rd September 2011
  #644
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldeanalogueguy View Post
dont believe everything you read
I want to believe
Quote:
we saw an electron go faster than light
saw?
Old 23rd September 2011
  #645
Lives for gear
 
doug hazelrigg's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Let me stop you right there. :-)

All these converters are oversampling converters and take a voltage measurement 6,144,000 times a second. That happens whether the base rate of the converter is set to 48Khz, 96Khz, or 192Khz. (5,644,800 times per second for sample rates of 44.1/88.2/176,4Khz)

This completely invalidates the argument for 192Khz sample rates.

Alistair
Hmmm.... I thought the type of oversampling you're describing was just an arithmetic multiplication of the datastream created at the base rate -- i.e., a computation using actual measurements that have already been taken... for example: the 44,100 20-bit words taken during 1 second of measuring inputs are then multiplied by a certain number (8x, 128x, etc.)... so that (assuming I'm right) there are no actual voltages being measured when that data is oversampled (using the method you've described).

But even there, a multiplication STILL requires a finite period of time within which to be made... there HAS to be an upper limit, it's intrinsic in nature. Yes, smaller circuits help surmount this, but only up to a point (because even gates, atoms and molecules have a size)

My understanding however may be flawed, and horribly
Old 23rd September 2011
  #646
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
There is never an alternate possibility against a theorem. ...


Re- your gravitational theory - abstract thought is great, but you need proof to make it worthwhile. Secondly - current thinking isn't a million miles away from this BUT I am no expert in astro-physics. I am, somewhat, an acknowledged and published expert when it comes to digital theorem. Tough eh ? heh


Or to put it bluntly - maybe the reason I'm immovable on this is cuz I've got a fuc.king PhD in the area.
Listen Narc...there most certainly are alternative possibilities, but really you just love to sit up there on your PhD...FTR the folks that I know with PhD's are usually the ones with a problematic senses of entitlement, have spent tax payers money fumbling around from their twemties to their late thirties really not giving anything back to society until they become "experts" somehow based on their inability to leave the security of the school yard (never having to hold a job) and walk around with their noses in the air...a PhD means nothing to a discussion if you aren't going to direct someone to something specific when they ask you kindly 5 times if you would, but yet still find it necessary to take personal shots time and again at your credibility, ability and brain power.

You really need a lesson in common courtesy. Like I said, I've been doing this as long or longer than you, so chill out and try explaining yourself al little better to me...or stop addressing me. I'm not into being berated OK? just answer the questions if you like. If you think my statements are stupid, that's your problem.

Proof doesn't make something worthwhile. Proof just gets other people on board. I'm a recording engineeer not a scientist...and we were having a friendly discussion until you and Blue decided that your patience with us mere peasants has run out...go away if you don't like this topic.

I'm happy considering what O says might be right and at this point. So you can just stop worrying about my abilities now..I'm fine.
Old 23rd September 2011
  #647
Lives for gear
 
doug hazelrigg's Avatar
Every time I think I have a solid grasp of this subject, guys like ya'll come along and help re-educate me
Old 23rd September 2011
  #648
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doug hazelrigg View Post
Every time I think I have a solid grasp of this subject, guys like ya'll come along and help re-educate me
+1! It's great isn't it

@MandyC, you've conveniently (?) neglected to quote the direct references to info ... if you can't stomach reading the full-on maths (I can't either!) then read some Nika Aldrich or visit DSP101 and d/l chapter 3
Old 23rd September 2011
  #649
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyC View Post
this is absolutely incorrect...it is soooo program dependent it isn't even funny...not to mention the ability of the mix engineer

-12RMS? why? because you said so...wow...you can mix something punchy @ -8 and you can mix a muddy undefined flat floppy fish @ -20

you really make no sense half of the time.
I was agreeing with Oldanalogueguy. PLUS he wasn't referring to mixes but CD (or other media) masters.

Think about it though - if you had a super smashed piece that would normally have RMS of -8 when peaking at zero. In a -12 RMS system it'd be peaking at -4 whereas the less limited track would have peaks right up to zero. You could take it further - go to -14. AnalogueGuy has it right there - and it's a great concept.
Old 23rd September 2011
  #650
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyC View Post
Listen Narc...there most certainly are alternative possibilities, but really you just love to sit up there on your PhD...FTR the folks that I know with PhD's are usually the ones with a problematic senses of entitlement, have spent tax payers money fumbling around from their twemties to their late thirties really not giving anything back to society until they become "experts" somehow based on their inability to leave the security of the school yard (never having to hold a job) and walk around with their noses in the air...a PhD means nothing to a discussion if you aren't going to direct someone to something specific when they ask you kindly 5 times if you would, but yet still find it necessary to take personal shots time and again at your credibility, ability and brain power.

You really need a lesson in common courtesy. Like I said, I've been doing this as long or longer than you, so chill out and try explaining yourself al little better to me...or stop addressing me. I'm not into being berated OK? just answer the questions if you like. If you think my statements are stupid, that's your problem.

Proof doesn't make something worthwhile. Proof just gets other people on board. I'm a recording engineeer not a scientist...and we were having a friendly discussion until you and Blue decided that your patience with us mere peasants has run out...go away if you don't like this topic.

I'm happy considering what O says might be right and at this point. So you can just stop worrying about my abilities now..I'm fine.
I've no doubt you've been doing it LONGER than me - I'm 42; got lucky - finished the PhD at 26 and whilst signed to EMI. But what does that have to do with anything? I'm not even sure what you're trying to imply there - but suffice to say.... beef curry.


As for the rest : awesome, but I really think you ought to read my reply again!! heh. I know a few things in things in life:

1. digital audio math.
2. how to mix a movie score
3. the law in music
4. where I live

I'm interested in:

1. astronomy (but only have an amateur grasp on anything but the math)
2. garage rock
3. cars
4. where I live.

Your credibility ? Un-damaged although I wouldn't trust ya on digital audio (yetheh).

Berated? nah.........
and finally - proof may not make something worthwhile - but it does make it right.
Old 23rd September 2011
  #651
Lives for gear
 
doug hazelrigg's Avatar
I'm just marginally aware of current and upcoming advances in quantum computing, nanotechnology, and molecular technology. But there will always be some finite limits to our tech:

>you can't have more digital data than there are atoms in the Universe

>we'll always face relativistic effects in our machines, so perfect time synchronization in a distributed system will never be possible

>there are various quantum effects, so that there are theoretical and practical limits to information density

>there are thermodynamic effects... Even if software is "weightless", the containers that deploy software do have mass and therefore any computation conducted against the data in those containers will dissipate heat

>with regards to software, although we have logarithmic and exponential algorithms to help us solve problems, there are some whose time complexity makes them essentially unusable

>any discrete system , like a computer, will have an element of uncertainty to it ( as opposed to a continuous system). It will always be thus
Old 23rd September 2011
  #652
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Holy guacamole!!

Like it !!heh
Old 23rd September 2011
  #653
Lives for gear
 
doug hazelrigg's Avatar
BTW

I believe there a samplers today that sample up to 40 gigasamples/per second, used in industry and probably medicine
Old 23rd September 2011
  #654
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doug hazelrigg View Post
BTW

I believe there a samplers today that sample up to 40 gigasamples/per second, used in industry and probably medicine
crazy!!
Old 23rd September 2011
  #655
Lives for gear
 
DaveUK's Avatar
Yikes!
I'm melting
Old 23rd September 2011
  #656
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
I've no doubt you've been doing it LONGER than me - I'm 42. What does that have to do with anything? I'm not even sure what you're trying to imply there - but suffice to say.... beef curry.


As for the rest : awesome, but I really think you ought to read my reply again!! heh. I know a few things in things in life:

1. digital audio math.
2. how to mix a movie score
3. the law in music
4. where I live

I'm interested in:

1. astronomy (but only have an amateur grasp on anything but the math)
2. garage rock
3. cars
4. where I live.

Your credibility ? Un-damaged although I wouldn't trust ya on digital audio (yetheh).

Berated? nah.........
and finally - proof may not make something worthwhile - but it does make it right.

The law in music? you are right? beef curry?

Actually we should call you narcisman shouldn't we?heh


You should probably get out of the studio from time to time...there's trees outside you know?
Old 24th September 2011
  #657
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyC View Post
The law in music? you are right? beef curry?

Actually we should call you narcisman shouldn't we?heh


You should probably get out of the studio from time to time...there's trees outside you know?
I really really should! To darn busy of late..... I've had ONE day off this year. The music world is getting hellish competitive in it's decline!

The law? Well, amongst other things - I own a UK based sync license company. Deal in all manner of legal shenanigans keeping our clients legal.... heh
Old 24th September 2011
  #658
Lives for gear
 
dcollins's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldeanalogueguy View Post
a feature that executes anybody who tries to ever push any signal over -12dBFS at any point in the signal chain.
if any sample ever touched 0dBFS they would be flogged and tortured first.
Thank you, as always, for your accurate and considered responses to the queries presented.

Quote:
other than that we would need to change many things to keep them all in balance. but just more headroom in the d/a to help overcome the nonsense the louder is better bunch does in the digital domain would be a start.
To allow for those inter-sample peaks that don't exist, no doubt..............


DC
Old 24th September 2011
  #659
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doug hazelrigg View Post
I'm just marginally aware of current and upcoming advances in quantum computing, nanotechnology, and molecular technology. But there will always be some finite limits to our tech:

>you can't have more digital data than there are atoms in the Universe

>we'll always face relativistic effects in our machines, so perfect time synchronization in a distributed system will never be possible

>there are various quantum effects, so that there are theoretical and practical limits to information density

>there are thermodynamic effects... Even if software is "weightless", the containers that deploy software do have mass and therefore any computation conducted against the data in those containers will dissipate heat

>with regards to software, although we have logarithmic and exponential algorithms to help us solve problems, there are some whose time complexity makes them essentially unusable

>any discrete system , like a computer, will have an element of uncertainty to it ( as opposed to a continuous system). It will always be thus
nutz

you can have as much data as 2**total number of PARTICLES
you dont have to limit yourself to electrons

and if you believe in intersample peaks then you can have as much data as you can count which is infinitely higher than the total number of particles and atoms and molecules etc. all combined.
Old 24th September 2011
  #660
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
I've no doubt you've been doing it LONGER than me - I'm 42; got lucky - finished the PhD at 26 and whilst signed to EMI. But what does that have to do with anything? I'm not even sure what you're trying to imply there - but suffice to say.... beef curry.

As for the rest : awesome, but I really think you ought to read my reply again!! heh. I know a few things in things in life:

1. digital audio math.
2. how to mix a movie score
3. the law in music
4. where I live

I'm interested in:

1. astronomy (but only have an amateur grasp on anything but the math)
2. garage rock
3. cars
4. where I live.

Your credibility ? Un-damaged although I wouldn't trust ya on digital audio (yetheh).

Berated? nah.........
and finally - proof may not make something worthwhile - but it does make it right.
you should look at quantum physics
that is really interesting and will expand your mind
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