|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.27.250.147
In Reply to: RE: The real question is - why do you feel the need to denigrate yourself, posting stuff like this? posted by Tony Lauck on April 07, 2014 at 14:04:29
" This includes a modest amount of digital room correction. This is something that some people have denigrated as degrading the sound."
Not a bad idea.
"There is no doubt that the degradation caused by the extra DSP processing is less than the overall acoustic benefits. Alternate ways of doing things might be better, such as adding a serious amount of bass traps (not practical in this room) or adding a hardware parametric equalizer (which might itself degrade sound quality). There are always tradeoffs."
Like you say there always trade offs. The room does cause more problems that many people realize. I was never big on tone controls. I do use room treatment, but it is not practical for everybody. I think DSP is not a bad idea at all.
Follow Ups:
the best results are down in separate hardware. It also depends on the room.
"the best results are down in separate hardware."
I think you are correct where DSD is involved, because the software approach requires a second level of delta-sigma modulation with extra high frequency noise. I'm not sure that this applies for PCM files, where the 24 bit PCM file can be converted to 32 bits and processed with very high accuracy by the convolution engine and then the 32 bit PCM sent to the DAC.
When I get a chance I will try running the Room EQ convolution off line and playing the convoluted files directly. That way there won't be any real-time processing affects of the computer to affect sound quality.
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: