|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
61.92.98.16
In Reply to: RE: I just found that MC 21 converts DSD to PCM before up sampling to 2x or 4X DSD. posted by Bibo01 on October 01, 2015 at 16:31:53
Hi,
Your tests tell you about the supersonic noise. They tell you little to not much at all about what really happens in the audio range. But surely that is what matters most?
Even if we look at the supersonic noise, it seems that you equate a ultrasonic noisefloor that peaks at -50dBFS @ 90kHz compared to one that has around -80dBFS @ 90kHz as "better", something I have serious problems with reconciling with reality.
I think it is important to listen to both modulators in the same chain and to select the better sounding one.
Ciao T
At 20 bits, you are on the verge of dynamic range covering fly-farts-at-20-feet to untolerable pain. Really, what more could we need?
Follow Ups:
Perhaps you did not look close enough and did not read my post no.10 and 14. (You can easily Google translate)
Although DSD64 and DSD128 were analysed to check quality of modulator, there are also other tests that further stress the modulator.
Hi,
Looking at the second set of tests I still do not see any objective reason to prefer a modulator with a massively higher level of noise Near the audioband over one that that has a much lower level of noise near the audio band.
It is pretty much impossible to predict what reaction a given chain will have to this, so I think one would have to listen for a comparison in a given chain with the results only valid for this chain.
Ciao T
At 20 bits, you are on the verge of dynamic range covering fly-farts-at-20-feet to untolerable pain. Really, what more could we need?
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: