Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: MQA Enabled ADCs

Posted by 13th Duke of Wymbourne on November 2, 2016 at 18:15:35:
Hi John,

I'll stick with my broad-brush 'an ADC is still an ADC' if only to back-up Jim's original statements and not to suggest that Isaac is in any way correct. Now, pretty much all (or just plain all?) ADCs are over-sampled types and the modulators are essentially similar, at least in my way of thinking. All highly-oversampled with a few bits of resolution. How those bit-streams are later decimated, with whatever resulting temporal response, is, to me, secondary.
As you mention DSD, I find it ironic that a recording format was developed to support 1-bit converters only for the converter industry to move away from 1-bit designs because they don't work that well.

When I see some of the arguments that have spun out of MQA related posts I am reminded of the New Yorker cartoon you told me about at the Newport Beach show in June!

Regards
13DoW