|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: RE: I Shouldn't Comment, But......... posted by Todd Krieger on May 19, 2009 at 00:05:03:
I will respond to your post in reverse order.> > I never recall hearing a semblance of the music signal from the interference via the AM radio. It just sounds like constant static.
An AM radio is a RF receiver that's is almost unique in it susceptibility to RFI(EMI actually), static exists because AM receivers attempt to demodulate spurious signals to an audio frequency. Amplifiers for example are not receivers and consequently much less susceptible.
> > The RFI is from the transistors in the DSP chips switching on and off with the data stream, sampled at a constant rate. Each bit in essence resembles a square wave, whose bandwidth goes well into the RF range. (Given the same power dissipation per bit, a 24/96 signal puts out over three times as much RFI relative to a 16/44 signal via NOS playback.)
The are a quite holes in this text. But rather than dwell on those, it is sufficient to say that this whole section falls apart because it ignores the key reasons why an AM radio is particularly susceptible to EMI. And sources of interference can be anything from a transformers, power supplies to oscillator circuits, claiming that AM radio static noise is as a result of DSP chips is a bit of a stretch. Which brings me back to my original point, you first have reliably identify the interference source.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: I Shouldn't Comment, But......... - theaudiohobby 05/19/0905:36:44 05/19/09 (1)
- RE: I Shouldn't Comment, But......... - Todd Krieger 11:31:32 05/19/09 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
