Jump to content
IGNORED

Bits, ghosts, and metaphysics...


Recommended Posts

loading a song into memory and then playing it from there practically eliminates the influence of any noise stored in the exact analog representation of the bits

 

Then why do .wav files stored at different locations often still sound a little different when played from System Memory using ASIO ?

You will also find many reports about this in Peter St's Phasure Forum. Despite being played from System memory using A.S.I.O., .wav files stored on an internal SSD powered by a good low noise +12V to +5V voltage regulator can sound markedly better than the same files stored on an internal HDD, even when the PC uses a Linear PSU..

This has also been confirmed in recent posts by other members.

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
IDEAS = Impulse Discharge + Event Atemporal Space

 

Impulse Discharge = writing 0s to memory before loading audio data into that memory. harmless, but useless as noise rather depends on the neighbouring data than on old values AND there are many refreshes taking care of this.

Is it all about the crosstalk noise or is this just your knowledge limiting you to this view? What I understood in my reading of IDEAS was that the evaluation of the next memory cell to access caused some delays - more delay than if the memory cells were contiguous.

 

Event Atemporal Space = load audio data into continous block of memory. Bullshit as DRAM is "Random Access Memory".
So what - just because something has the name Random in it doesn't mean it has to be used like that. In my computer days we were asked to increase the response time of a Data General minicomputer system.Analysis showed that disk access was the bottleneck & further analysis showed that the most accessed data was randomly scattered throughout the disk. Moving this data to contiguous space at the centre of the disk made a huge improvement in the run-times of the large reports that had to be done. These could now be completed overnight whereas before they were running well into the following day.

 

Contiguous memory, I'm pretty sure, can offer timing improvements which may have significance for D to A conversion?

Regarding the Memory Player and the 5 steps of jitter erasure, 1 and 4 is what I would expect as benefits of playing from memory. 2 is improving headroom and potentially useful. 3 is bullshit as 32 bit operations are fast, even when they incur a 64 bit (8 banks x 1 byte) resd or write. 5 I will not comment on as I do not know their DAC design and I'm sure there are people more qualified than me in this respect.
I'm not really interested in the rest of this
Link to comment
Then why do .wav files stored at different locations often still sound a little different when played from System Memory using ASIO ?

You will also find many reports about this in Peter St's Phasure Forum. Despite being played from System memory using A.S.I.O., .wav files stored on an internal SSD powered by a good low noise +12V to +5V voltage regulator can sound markedly better than the same files stored on an internal HDD, even when the PC uses a Linear PSU..

This has also been confirmed in recent posts by other members.

 

Well I can't say with certainty having not experienced this nor investigated in a rigorous fashion, however it is certainly possible that the internal SSD has a better noise profile. One could design studies to control for many variables, as well as perform measurement to attempt to quantitate this. As I've said before, my own approach has been to entirely eliminate the SSD/HDD/SATA interface so as to eliminate these variables.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
Then why do .wav files stored at different locations often still sound a little different when played from System Memory using ASIO ?

You will also find many reports about this in Peter St's Phasure Forum. Despite being played from System memory using A.S.I.O., .wav files stored on an internal SSD powered by a good low noise +12V to +5V voltage regulator can sound markedly better than the same files stored on an internal HDD, even when the PC uses a Linear PSU..

This has also been confirmed in recent posts by other members.

 

Are you talking about a single computer with both drives installed and powered up at the same time or are the drives swapped out for comparison? If the latter, the most probable cause is that the internal SSD is introducing less noise into the system.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
... Disc (and flash?) storage locations can be and are saturated to different levels depending on the strength (amplitude) of the waveform at the moment. These variations in saturation levels at each storage location trace the amplitude of the analog wave, in effect storing the time variation (slope) of the analog waveform, and thus any jitter (late or early zero crossing) that was part of it. ...

 

For modern disk storage at least, a given bit is not directly represented by a specific magnetic strength value. It is stored as a pattern of magnetic strengths / transitions. In some cases, the exact pattern used for a bit will vary depending on the pattern used for the previous and next bits. Something similar but simpler is used for CD - bits are grouped into 8 bit codes, then stored on disk as a 14 bit pattern.

 

Flash memory can store 1 to (currently) 4 bits per memory cell, depending on the specific architecture used. Again, due to error correction architecture, there is often not a direct relationship between a given "cell bit" and an actual data bit.

 

But in all cases, variations in the analogue amplitude / saturation value is irrelevant provided it is reliably detectable as being above or below the 1/0 decision level. What is important (for serial stream devices such as disks and USB) is that the reading mechanism has to know when to make the 1/0 decision. It does this by detecting when the analog value / waveform changes from one state to the other, then making the 1/0 decision when it judges that it is at an optimum time (usually half way) between that time and the predicted next transition. This is known as clock recovery. Variations in the actual vs predicted transition time cause the clock to revise its estimate of the best time to make the decision. Hence, "jitter". It's like the difference between walking up evenly spaced stairs and stairs with uneven widths. You have to keep altering your stride length to reliably centre your foot on each step.

 

The operation of the digital logic around the clock circuitry generates a specific "signature" of variations in power supply current and "ground plane" potential. Variations in the clock generate variations in this signature. In a poorly designed / engineered DAC, these power supply / ground plane level fluctuations can cause variations in the timing of the clock used to convert the bit values to analogue output, or directly affect the analogue output stages. A DAC so afflicted will always have variations in the analogue output due to the digital "signature", and these variations will differ when the clock has to change due to variations in the incoming signal timing.

 

As several people have pointed out, the jitter is lost if the recovered data bits are stored for future use instead of being fed to a DAC. New (and different) jitter is added when the data is later read from the storage. It's quite possible for the jitter pattern to differ for two sources - for example, for two different files on disk or in memory. If the DAC is susceptible, the analogue output will likewise differ. The challenge for the DAC designer / engineer is to reduce the effects on the analogue output to an amount far too small to be audible.

 

Do I understand the scenario correctly?

"People hear what they see." - Doris Day

The forum would be a much better place if everyone were less convinced of how right they were.

Link to comment
Are you talking about a single computer with both drives installed and powered up at the same time or are the drives swapped out for comparison? If the latter, the most probable cause is that the internal SSD is introducing less noise into the system.

 

Tom

I am talking about a computer with both SSDs and HDDs operational.

The PCB shown in the photo powers both the OS and a Music SSD separately by regulating the internal +12V SMPS supply down to a VERY clean +5V. The biggest advantage it confers is isolation. The photo shows only 1 output connected. The Inputs are in parallel .My point is that when playing from System Memory, according to currently accepted theory, there should be no audible differences. That is incorrect, and has already been verified by a fairly recent C.A. poster who tried a low noise (40uV) adjustable voltage regulator PSU PCB recently to power his SSD as I suggested as a cheaper alternative.

 

Ultra LOW Noise 40

Alex

 

2KKAI5.jpg

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
Then why do .wav files stored at different locations often still sound a little different when played from System Memory using ASIO ?

 

There are possible reasons for this - I'm not saying this is impossible. But the variations in e.g. magnetic strength on the harddisk are not the reason when playing from memory.

Home: Apple Macbook Pro 17" --Mini-Toslink--> Cambridge Audio DacMagic --XLR--> 2x Genelec 8020B

Work: Apple Macbook Pro 15" --USB--> Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 --1/4\"--> Superlux HD668B / 2x Genelec 6010A

Link to comment

Do I understand the scenario correctly?

 

Yes. And nice explanation of why playback can be affected, but the systematic connection is not given.

Home: Apple Macbook Pro 17" --Mini-Toslink--> Cambridge Audio DacMagic --XLR--> 2x Genelec 8020B

Work: Apple Macbook Pro 15" --USB--> Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 --1/4\"--> Superlux HD668B / 2x Genelec 6010A

Link to comment
There are possible reasons for this - I'm not saying this is impossible. But the variations in e.g. magnetic strength on the harddisk are not the reason when playing from memory.

 

I have never claimed that they are the reasons. I simply report my findings in that area that been confirmed by quite a members of this and other forums, and by Martin Colloms, John Kenny with Marcin from jPlay and quite a few others.

I have found however, that even when using the USB Regen with a much improved PSU, that previous identical .wav files stored on the same USB memory stick only result in a minor improvement when played back using the Regen in line, whereas fresh rips directly to the same USB memory stick with the Regen in line when saved, result in MARKED improvements when played back. This tends to suggest that perhaps there may be something like irreversible Jitter embedded in the original files, perhaps similar to what can happen with worn CD Glass masters at the production stage ? . However, that is ONLY a wild guess.

 

dlSxS5.jpg

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
.... It's like the difference between walking up evenly spaced stairs and stairs with uneven widths. You have to keep altering your stride length to reliably centre your foot on each step.

 

The operation of the digital logic around the clock circuitry generates a specific "signature" of variations in power supply current and "ground plane" potential. Variations in the clock generate variations in this signature. In a poorly designed / engineered DAC, these power supply / ground plane level fluctuations can cause variations in the timing of the clock used to convert the bit values to analogue output, or directly affect the analogue output stages. A DAC so afflicted will always have variations in the analogue output due to the digital "signature", and these variations will differ when the clock has to change due to variations in the incoming signal timing.

 

....

 

What is exactly a "digital signature"? To me, this sounds like an analogue wave fluctuation. How does it get "converted" into 0's and 1's that are then processed by a calculating core down the chain?

 

Also, if it is a timing issue, how does these get processed in a DAC that has an asychronos buffer (and "retimes" everything anyways)?

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
Is it all about the crosstalk noise or is this just your knowledge limiting you to this view?

 

It is, of course, not all about capacitative crosstalk noise. I'm just using this as an example of a systematic (even data dependent) noise contributor strong enough to dominate any potentially transferred noise from the harddisk magnetization strength.

 

There are other factors at work, e.g. inductive crosstalk, time and temperature dependent cell leakage, and, of course, cosmic rays and other radiation sources. (OT: Cosmic rays are responsible for virtualy all bit flips observed in DDR3 modules. Still, they are uncommon enough not to worry about for audio playback.)

 

What I understood in my reading of IDEAS was that the evaluation of the next memory cell to access caused some delays - more delay than if the memory cells were contiguous.

 

So what - just because something has the name Random in it doesn't mean it has to be used like that. In my computer days we were asked to increase the response time of a Data General minicomputer system.Analysis showed that disk access was the bottleneck & further analysis showed that the most accessed data was randomly scattered throughout the disk. Moving this data to contiguous space at the centre of the disk made a huge improvement in the run-times of the large reports that had to be done. These could now be completed overnight whereas before they were running well into the following day.

 

My bad for simplifying it too much. For RAM the access time for any cell is in principle constant while for e.g. harddisks it is not. Given prefetch buffers (and CPU caches), reading data contiguously from one physical row does have some advantages vs reading bytes from random location - both timing wise and w.r.t. the power signature.

 

Contiguous memory, I'm pretty sure, can offer timing improvements which may have significance for D to A conversion?

 

In theory, yes. But it does not matter much in practice. Because even when fragmented, page sizes are typically 4K, meaning data is in practice read from the same row. An unrealistically extreme case of memory fragmentation would result in just a doubling of row activations. In real-world scenarios, memory for memory play will be allocated contiguously by default.

Home: Apple Macbook Pro 17" --Mini-Toslink--> Cambridge Audio DacMagic --XLR--> 2x Genelec 8020B

Work: Apple Macbook Pro 15" --USB--> Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 --1/4\"--> Superlux HD668B / 2x Genelec 6010A

Link to comment

Also, if it is a timing issue, how does these get processed in a DAC that has an asychronos buffer (and "retimes" everything anyways)?

 

Asynchronous buffers are not perfect. That said, he was talking about less than optimally implemented DACs.

Home: Apple Macbook Pro 17" --Mini-Toslink--> Cambridge Audio DacMagic --XLR--> 2x Genelec 8020B

Work: Apple Macbook Pro 15" --USB--> Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 --1/4\"--> Superlux HD668B / 2x Genelec 6010A

Link to comment
What is exactly a "digital signature"? To me, this sounds like an analogue wave fluctuation. How does it get "converted" into 0's and 1's that are then processed by a calculating core down the chain?

 

Also, if it is a timing issue, how does these get processed in a DAC that has an asychronos buffer (and "retimes" everything anyways)?

 

It sounds like you might be confusing the original analogue value representing a data bit that gets measured and decided whether it is a 1 or 0, with the fluctuations in the power supply of the circuit caused by the switching of the digital logic that makes the decision.

 

At its simplest, digital circuitry is a series of electronic switches. Every time one switches on or off, it draws a pulse of current from the power supply. Imagine if each switch were a physical device like a light switch, every time it switched it would go "click" or "clack". If that noise were allowed to leak into your listening room, it would be audible. With digital logic, the noise is electrical, but it can still be heard under some circumstances. For example:

 

 

Espionage agencies have long taken advantage of digital signatures. For example, it is possible to pick up the radiation of the electrical noise from a computer monitor and reconstruct the displayed data on a remote display. There's a whole industry involved in doing this and defending against it:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempest_%28codename%29

 

Getting back to audio, if the electronic switch is part of, for example, a USB receiver chip, if the incoming bitstream is steady (no jitter) the switching pulses will also be regularly spaced. If there is jitter, the switching pulses will be irregularly spaced. If the resulting stream of pulses (variations in the power supply) is allowed to affect the DAC clock or the analogue output stages, it can affect the audio.

 

You may have seen house lights flicker when a refrigerator or other appliance starts up. This is caused by the pulse of current drawn by the appliance as it "switches". If your digital bedside clock radio is about to change its display from one minute to the next, the pulse may make it switch slightly early or late. Or, the pulse may be heard in the audio directly if the radio is playing.

 

As to your second question, earlier transfer systems such as S/PDIF and original streaming USB were one-way. Data came, and you had to use it or lose it. Therefore, the DAC had to synchronise the DAC clock to the rate of the incoming data. This meant that if the incoming data rate varied (jitter), the DAC clock also varied. As digital logic has become cheaper and more complex, it has become practical to put a buffer between the input and the DAC chip, and asynchronous protocols make it possible to just request data as required to keep the buffer full.

This disconnects the DAC clock from the input data clock, removing one way for jitter to affect the DAC output. However, great care still has to be taken to prevent the electrical noise generated by the digital input circuitry from affecting the operation (timing) of the DAC clock, or leaking onto the analogue output stages.

 

Personally, I don't subscribe to devices such as USB regenerators. DACs that are susceptible to jitter on the incoming data aren't just affected by jitter. They are equally affected by data without jitter. That is, the noise generated by the switching of the digital logic is always affecting the DAC output. I'd rather spend my money on a DAC which is unaffected.

"People hear what they see." - Doris Day

The forum would be a much better place if everyone were less convinced of how right they were.

Link to comment

Don

A nice reply, but I have to ask if you use DACs via USB, and if you have actually tried an UpTone USB Regen with one ?

If you do use USB, then perhaps another N.Z. member could loan you his, to see whether or not it does make any difference with your "perfect" DAC.

 

Regards

Alex

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
It sounds like you might be confusing the original analogue value representing a data bit that gets measured and decided whether it is a 1 or 0, with the fluctuations in the power supply of the circuit caused by the switching of the digital logic that makes the decision.

...

This disconnects the DAC clock from the input data clock, removing one way for jitter to affect the DAC output. However, great care still has to be taken to prevent the electrical noise generated by the digital input circuitry from affecting the operation (timing) of the DAC clock, or leaking onto the analogue output stages.

 

Well said, Don.

 

 

I I'd rather spend my money on a DAC which is unaffected.

 

Then you have very few choices !

Link to comment

Don - an excellent analysis. I agree, and as far as jitter goes, we cannot neglect it, but it seems with asynchronous USB we have one effective way of minimizing its consequences. Given that, I am not sure why it keeps coming up, except for traditional and theoretical reasons as opposed to practical ones these days. I think today that noise, as opposed to jitter, is likely the potential chief extraneous component that might negatively affect computer audio.

 

One thing that your post omits is the possibility, as we know, that noise can also creep into the DAC via the USB power connection from the upstream computer, hubs, etc. if the DAC is connected to and utilizes that power. I am speculating and many may disagree, but I wonder if it is possible that the benefits of Regen, for example, might be more about regenerating that USB power than they are about regenerating the digital signal, which it also does. At least, it might be a combination of both power and signal regeration. This might explain in part why some DACS are more positively improved by Regen than others, since some use USB power while others do not. It also might explain in part why some feel that a better power supply into the Regen is an improvement over Regen's stock SMPS.

Link to comment
Don

A nice reply, but I have to ask if you use DACs via USB, and if you have actually tried an UpTone USB Regen with one ?

If you do use USB, then perhaps another N.Z. member could loan you his, to see whether or not it does make any difference with your "perfect" DAC.

 

Regards

Alex

 

No, I don't use a USB DAC. When / if I'm ever in the market for one, I'll do due diligence and note which ones have proven unmoved by the use of different cables or regenerator type devices. Dave's doubts notwithstanding, I should have little trouble finding something suitable. Given my musical tastes, I only need something that's "close enough for rock'n'roll". It's the principle of the thing - as I've said elsewhere, if a designer / engineer hasn't bothered to get the USB input right, what other areas has he not bothered to get right?

"People hear what they see." - Doris Day

The forum would be a much better place if everyone were less convinced of how right they were.

Link to comment
...

 

One thing that your post omits is the possibility, as we know, that noise can also creep into the DAC via the USB power connection from the upstream computer, hubs, etc. if the DAC is connected to and utilizes that power. I am speculating and many may disagree, but I wonder if it is possible that the benefits of Regen, for example, might be more about regenerating that USB power than they are about regenerating the digital signal, which it also does. At least, it might be a combination of both power and signal regeration. This might explain in part why some DACS are more positively improved by Regen than others, since some use USB power while others do not. It also might explain in part why some feel that a better power supply into the Regen is an improvement over Regen's stock SMPS.

 

If the DAC is affected by noise on the USB power or ground, then the fix is simpler than a Regen. Use a cable with the power and ground wires cut, and use a high quality 5V supply for the DAC if it is USB powered. (There are a couple of caveats with this approach, but they can be managed.)

"People hear what they see." - Doris Day

The forum would be a much better place if everyone were less convinced of how right they were.

Link to comment
If the DAC is affected by noise on the USB power or ground, then the fix is simpler than a Regen. Use a cable with the power and ground wires cut, and use a high quality 5V supply for the DAC if it is USB powered. (There are a couple of caveats with this approach, but they can be managed.)

Don

USB connected storage medium, (including a USB memory stick) is also afflicted by such problems, just as a DAC using a USB input is.

I have posted quite a few times in recent years (before SOtM USB and iFi USB became available) about the very real benefits of using a very low impedance , and low noise external Linear +5V supply using a version of a shunt regulator (J.L.H.) and a modified USB cable where the +5V is disconnected at the PC's USB-A plug, yet the John Swenson designed Regen when used the same way with an improved external PSU EASILY outperforms it, just as the JLH PSU did against not using an external PSU.

BTW, part of the problem is related to ground loops, as the 0 volts line and the shield are usually connected together in the USB device itself. A further improvement can usually be obtained by disconnecting the shield immediately before the USB device, AND inserting a small amount of resistance in the 0volts line as John Swenson has also done in the Amber Regen. That added resistance was also discussed in a thread here several years earlier.

 

Alex

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
The theory is that "frozen jitter" is embedded in the surface of the media, not in the data itself. If this is the case, copying or reading the data into memory should cause such "frozen jitter" to disappear or perhaps even be replaced by different "frozen jitter". "Frozen jitter" should also not affect the checksum as programs for calculating checksums only look at the data, not the actual waveforms captured on the media.

 

thanks for expanding.

trying to wrap head around this possibility. implications are ‘ginormous’.

so far, have yet to encounter any verifiable visible/audible variations in 'file integrity' on the same computer running the same programmes to view/edit/save/back-up copies of thousands of digital photo and video files. to/from numerous SD cards, CD-ROMs, DVD-ROMs, HDDs, SSDs, USB memory devices and online storage. via USB2/3, Thunderbolt, Firewire, Ethernet and Wi-fi interfaces.

okay, can live with a maybe: that one’s screen/eyes/ears/brains are not resolving/discerning enough.

given that ‘frozen jitter’/‘media surface variations’/‘switching click-clacks' may affect audio playback, would it follow that such things may also potentially affect photo and video files as well?

Link to comment
If the DAC is affected by noise on the USB power or ground, then the fix is simpler than a Regen. Use a cable with the power and ground wires cut, and use a high quality 5V supply for the DAC if it is USB powered. (There are a couple of caveats with this approach, but they can be managed.)

Yea, the big caveat being - USB data transmission won't work without ground :)

And please don't come back & say it's differential i.e find out about ground offset tolerances

Link to comment
If the DAC is affected by noise on the USB power or ground, then the fix is simpler than a Regen. Use a cable with the power and ground wires cut, and use a high quality 5V supply for the DAC if it is USB powered. (There are a couple of caveats with this approach, but they can be managed.)

 

Seems like this should be the case but given USB specified impedances etc. the fix may be exactly as simple as the Regen (having used the exact 'fix' you propose before switching to the Regen). Grounds can be trickier than they first appear.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment

Don, as others have already said, a wonderful explanation.

 

My quibble, again as others have mentioned, is your reference to DACs that are "unaffected." If you change that to "less affected," we're in agreement. Perhaps this is what you were saying when you spoke of "close enough for rock 'n' roll" in a following post.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Don - an excellent analysis. I agree, and as far as jitter goes, we cannot neglect it, but it seems with asynchronous USB we have one effective way of minimizing its consequences. Given that, I am not sure why it keeps coming up, except for traditional and theoretical reasons as opposed to practical ones these days

 

I suspect that the reason "it keeps coming up" is that folks want an explanation for what they believe they are hearing. There seems to be a basic "analogue/digital" confusion, or a tendency to try to understand digital in a way that does not make sense to me. I appreciate the good explanation of what a "digital signature" is, yet it seems like (yet another) tangent - I see no explanation of how it gets "converted" or "encoded" into digital information that results in two identical files being "heard" differently (assuming they are being delivered to the DAC in the same way - which with asynchronous buffers is the case)

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
thanks for expanding.

trying to wrap head around this possibility. implications are ‘ginormous’.

so far, have yet to encounter any verifiable visible/audible variations in 'file integrity' on the same computer running the same programmes to view/edit/save/back-up copies of thousands of digital photo and video files. to/from numerous SD cards, CD-ROMs, DVD-ROMs, HDDs, SSDs, USB memory devices and online storage. via USB2/3, Thunderbolt, Firewire, Ethernet and Wi-fi interfaces.

okay, can live with a maybe: that one’s screen/eyes/ears/brains are not resolving/discerning enough.

given that ‘frozen jitter’/‘media surface variations’/‘switching click-clacks' may affect audio playback, would it follow that such things may also potentially affect photo and video files as well?

 

I have not observed this phenomena "in the wild" and cannot wrap my mind around how it would survive a file being copied or played back so I'm putting "frozen jitter" on my list of things to worry about at some point in the future when I run out of other ways to spend my time.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...