In Reply to: RE: True but ... posted by PeterSt on January 15, 2009 at 13:46:47:
I don't think I will accept the challenge, because I don't understand the premise. (Not the same as working with fixed point arithmetic, which I did at a summer job I had in 1960.)
I don't quite get what people are looking for with NOS DACs. If they filter by analog means they are doing something that could as well have been done digitally. If they don't filter they are not outputting a waveform that accurately reflects the input signal, except for square waves that happen to be at a sub-multiple of the sampling frequency. Unfiltered DACs output amusical image frequencies and this effect can be easily heard by experimenting with very low sampling rates, such as 8 kHz. (I first ran into these effects with playing around with the Apple II circa 1980.)
I have no problem with digital volume controls, by the way. And if they are used with dither they will work perfectly well at 24 bits, except possibly when listening to Rock Music in cryogenic temperatures. (Otherwise, the random thermal motion of the air will exceed the affect of the dither noise.) Failure to dither at 24 bits may or may not be a problem, but some chip vendors are now marketing 32 bit DACs for those who think that it may be.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: True but ... - Tony Lauck 01/15/0914:54:48 01/15/09 (10)
- RE: True but ... - Jim F. 16:54:34 01/15/09 (9)
- Fads and Fabrications - Tony Lauck 17:47:06 01/15/09 (1)
- RE: Fads and Fabrications - Jim F. 18:16:44 01/15/09 (0)
- RE: True but ... - Jim F. 17:10:46 01/15/09 (6)
- NOS - PeterSt 01:31:01 01/16/09 (2)
- RE: NOS - Jim F. 12:20:11 01/16/09 (1)
- RE: True but ... - Tony Lauck 18:13:24 01/15/09 (2)
- RE: True but ... - Jim F. 19:28:12 01/15/09 (1)
- RE: True but ... - Tony Lauck 20:13:45 01/15/09 (0)