|
Home
/ FAQ
/ News Classifieds / Events |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer |
Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
71.202.211.24
In Reply to: RE: the dubious pleasures of resampling posted by steppe on May 30, 2009 at 13:21:27
Hey serge,
Forgive my ignorance, but I thought all this depends on the dac. Some handle different rates better dont they?
Hello! Yes, I think that generally resampling takes place within dac but not in case of cMp-cPlay, I believe, where it is done by src or sox and then fed to the dac to be used for conversion unaltered. The process for resampling can be different depending on the math. In graphics, which, I repeat, is very similiar to wave, the math can be bicubic, bilinear and some others, also different dithering (even the terms are the same) processes are involved like bayer, fatting, floyd-steinberg math, diffusion, dispersion... Next, if I remember correctly, some DAC manufacturers employ tracing - the process that converts our wave into scaleable peak which is closest to analogue (according to their decision and or understanding). IMHO one of the best but hardest ways to achieve the best sound is to try to read and convert to analog every bit to the last one, but I am not an engineer nor am I a program developer, so I may be mistaken, but resampling does NOTHING to bring us closer to truth. I will prepare more pictures with dithering and vectorization (bezier) examples, used in graphics that closely resemble what is happening to the wav within the dac or resampling program (if it is interesting). Also, once again I want to say that I am not trying to discourage anybody from resampling, nor am I ungratefull or trying to say that Sics is doing something wrong.
Serge.
what the heck does that have to do with anything. You are listening to a live event through speakers , in a different room, with different amplification, at different volume, at a different distance, with different cabling, in digital, with different DAC"s, and different computer chips, different versions of cPlay (or other players), oversampling DAC's....etc.
It's a friggin representation of an event.
You should know that with your photographic endeavors. Fidelity is a goal but it is more than pure specifications.
If every system sounds different what is TRUTH?
Now remember that I am sensitive to this being a professional photographer. I hear comments like "is that the way it really looked?" all the time. I try to explain that the slide film I use responds differently than the eye to a scene and the Ilfochrome has it's own character which is dependent on the illumination etc etc. Even the most accurate photograph is a representation and fine art is an "Artist's" representation.
So everything is but a representation and higher bit depth and sampling rates are the way of the futuure. Right now the playback hardware is ahead of the media. Non oversampling DAC's will probably never be made again in light of HD audio. So we live with it and find better ways.
Bob
www.PlateauLight.com
D,
I try to explain that the slide film I use responds differently than the eye to a scene and the Ilfochrome has it's own character which is dependent on the illumination etc etc.
I think that is what I was getting at. I thought some dacs like getting info at say 24/96 while others might be better off at 24/192.
I mean the initial wav file. Nothing more.
Serge
Post a Followup:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2009, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ Go Green ]
[ Take5 ]