In Reply to: Re: this is a pretty biased description posted by Peter Qvortrup on December 12, 2003 at 00:19:48:
"direct relationship between the level of oversampling or signal manipulation and the level homogenisation of the sound, so the higher the oversampling rate the worse the sound"I do not agree with this. PCM at 192 kHz should be better than PCM at 44 kHz. PCM at 1000 kHz should be even better. Sigma delta modulation, in similar fashion, the more samples per second, the more audio information is taken.
I don't know why you use "oversampling". This is pure digital sampling- there is no "over" about it.
"Ask yourself why would it need to be fed back if there were no errors??"
There are no errors. This is the truth. This is not like negative feedback in an amplifier. Check it out.
"Butter is analogue, margarine is digital, it does not exist in nature either."
Of course analog exists in nature. One example- tree rings store in analog fashion the record of weather cycles.
"One man's elegance is another man's cultural vandalism"
Have no idea what you are trying to say.
May I suggest- most people for obvious reasons are very familiar with PCM, it has been in use in audio for 20 years now. And most people are not familiar with sigma delta modulation. They should not conclude, because it seems strange and unfamiliar to them, that there is something more "natural" about PCM.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: this is a pretty biased description - tunenut 12/12/0309:18:38 12/12/03 (4)
- Re: this is a pretty biased description - Peter Qvortrup 04:59:44 12/13/03 (3)
- thank you for your thoughtful replies - tunenut 12:29:37 12/13/03 (1)
- Re: thank you for your thoughtful replies - Peter Qvortrup 04:26:53 12/14/03 (0)
- Question for Mr. Q - rupertdacat 11:00:49 12/13/03 (0)