|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
87.228.164.109
In Reply to: That's interesting - my experiences are slightly different posted by Christine Tham on January 31, 2007 at 20:23:28:
As I pointed out before, this may be due to band width limiting on the 1212. Use a top quality play back system, and the result may be different.
Follow Ups:
.
There are serious issues in imposing band limiting at 20k on a 96/192k card.First it makes the measurements better and EMU/Creative are good at this game.
Second, why introduce phase issues by having an extra hf filter when it is the design and operation of the digital filter that plays a key part in making hirez digital audio sound good.
Yes, we all know you hate Creative, but why do you have to lie and make up untruths to justify your bias?There is no "extra filter", and at 96kHz the E-MU 1212M has a usable frequency response (+/-3dB) up to 48kHz. I have no idea what you mean by "band limiting".
I suspect you have never owned this card and have never measured it, and all you are doing is spreading misinformation based on prejudice.
Hey Fangirl - see EMU specAnalog Line Outputs (2) Type: Balanced, low-noise, 3-pole low-pass differential filter
D/A converter: CS4398
Level (software selectable):
- Professional: +4dBu nominal, 20dBu max (balanced)
- Consumer: -10dBV nominal, 6dBV max (unbalanced)
Frequency Response (20Hz - 20kHz): + 0.0/-.35dB,
Dynamic Range (1kHz, A-weighted): 120dB
Signal-to-Noise Ratio (A-weighted): 120dB
THD+N (1kHz at -1dBFS): -105dB (.0006%)
Stereo Crosstalk (1kHz at -1dBFS): < -115dB
There is a low pass filter other than the brickwall filter. I read this in a review before I decided not to buy the 1212M.Just because you own one and seem to think that you are the only authority, there is no need to accuse people of lying.
Actually the EMU manual says it is a two-pole filter. Why don't you eat your own words and accuse EMU of lying?
What's so strange about the specs? Doesn't say anything about "extra" filter to me. You do realise that every DAC needs a low pass analog filter post DAC, don't you, and that E-MU is simply describing the characteristics of this filter?*** There is a low pass filter other than the brickwall filter. I read this in a review before I decided not to buy the 1212M. ***
If you are referring to the low pass analog reconstruction filter, then yes every DAC needs one (and it is separate from the digital oversampling brickwall filter). This is also the case for the RME and Lynx and in fact the majority of DAC designs, so you shouldn't buy them either.
The only DACs that don't have two filters are non-oversampling or non-sigma delta modulated designs (which are in a tiny, and disappearing, minority).
*** Just because you own one and seem to think that you are the only authority, there is no need to accuse people of lying. ***
No, I don't think I am the "only" authority, but I do speak from experience. If you truly believe there is some sort of extra "evil" filter in the 1212M (over and above the digital filter and the required analog reconstruction filter), why don't you show us exactly where it is located on the circuit board?
Incidentally, since you are so hot against "extra" filters and "band width limiting", you do realise that this is exactly what upsampling is? Upsampling is a fancy term for an extra, redundant, "band limiting" digital filter.
If you are as knowledgeable as you make it out to be, you will know that a 3-pole active filter is not necessary from 20k. There are manufacturers who use much slower slopes for better sonics. In this sense, the EMU is band limiting. I would summise that this is for spec reasons, to cut out hf artefacts.As for digital filters, there are filters and filters. See dcsltd.co.uk for white papers on how these affect the sound.
.
nt
If you can't, then you are either lying, or don't know what you are talking about, or both.PS - I hope you realise that the number of poles does not indicate the steepness of the filter. You are confusing between poles and orders I think. In any case, measured data shows that the frequency response is +/-3dB to 48kHz for a 96kHz sampling rate I fail to understand exactly where the bandwidth is limited, except at Nyquist.
Why do you think that people lie. Perhaps this tells more about yourself.
Let's see ...1. You claim there is an "extra" filter, but cannot or will not show us where this filter is located.
2. You say the output is "bandwidth limited", yet measured results say otherwise.
Why do I think you are lying? Gee, I don't know ...
Furthermore, you confuse between filter slope and the number of poles in a filter - two unrelated concepts.
Can you give us one reason why we should even pay any attention to anything you say in the future? Otherwise, it's time to move on.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: