In Reply to: Oh, we could be zeroes, just for one day ... posted by Werner on February 26, 2007 at 00:26:29:
"2) Mathematically there is not much wrong with ASRC."Very true. Because no standard criteria was ever established to define "correct" in this regard. Hence no basis to claim it's doing something wrong, objectively speaking.
But my ears tell me there's a lot wrong with ASRC. But in the scheme of things, it's only one man's opinion.
And while I've explained the flaws of ASRC, it's nothing more than a theory of mine. It's never been proven unequivocally. Although I'm starting to see this "transformation of jitter to noise" show up from other critics of the conversion method.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Oh, we could be zeroes, just for one day ... - Todd Krieger 10:52:10 02/28/07 (11)
- You might be interested in this ... - Christine Tham 14:32:14 02/28/07 (10)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Werner 23:28:55 02/28/07 (9)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Christine Tham 23:48:47 02/28/07 (8)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Werner 03:18:08 03/01/07 (7)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Christine Tham 13:26:53 03/01/07 (6)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Werner 00:07:15 03/02/07 (5)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Christine Tham 16:58:49 03/02/07 (4)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Werner 00:31:32 03/05/07 (3)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Christine Tham 14:58:30 03/05/07 (2)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Werner 23:41:41 03/05/07 (1)
- Re: You might be interested in this ... - Christine Tham 14:10:30 03/06/07 (0)