Chords New M -Scaler

[firedog]

17 hours ago, ecwl said:

In order to be able to do that, you need to upsample the signal say 44kHz 16-bit to a higher frequency sample say 705.4kHz so that you're filling in the gaps between the original samples to regenerate the original analog waveform.

Isn't this "filling in the gaps" a misconception? So I don't think that's the rationale behind the design. 

[firedog]

Just now, Jud said:

 

That's right. The filling-in-the-gaps metaphor is "analog intuition," which often doesn't work well with digital audio.  ?

 

However, it doesn't mean upsampling can't be beneficial (though by another means than gap-filling).  That's presumably why it's been a standard step in processing digital audio since before there were such things as commercially available separate DACs.

Yes, of course, but the actual working rationale for upsampling seems to be that it lets you work with less steep filters resulting in  better results in the analog reconstruction. 

[firedog]

2 hours ago, mansr said:

If a cake recipe calls for vinegar, I suspect we can all say something about how it is likely to taste without actually eating it.

I guess you don't bake much. Lots of good cake recipes use vinegar or other similar tasting ingredients. It's all in the taste you get in the end from the combination of ingredients.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

You can still predict something about the result just looking at the recipe. Things have known tastes that combine in known ways. In electronics, components behave in predictable ways. It is not necessary to listen to everything in order get some idea of how it might sound, especially when the question is simply whether or not a specific change will make an audible difference. It's how things are designed. Or did you think people like Rob Watts wire together a bunch of parts at random until they chance upon something that works?

Wow. You made the silly and incorrect statement that you can basically tell that a cake recipe containing vinegar will taste bad. I corrected you, as you clearly are unaware of the many cake recipes that use vinegar and similar ingredients. You seem to have no issue making all kinds of sharp statements here correcting others whenever you think someone else is wrong about something.

Why the knee jerk defense of your incorrect statement and the move to a mini lecture about electronics?

 

You clearly got out of your knowledge zone talking about cake recipes. I corrected you but wasn't nasty. Maybe just accept you were incorrect.  

[firedog]

3 hours ago, mansr said:

Where did I say it would taste bad?

Give it up. You were wrong about something. Live with it.

[firedog]

15 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

I guess some people don't appreciate irony.  The developer of HQ Player hijacked this M-Scaler thread to criticize the approach of Rob Watts and explain why HQ Player is better.  Among other things, he mentioned that the number of taps is a meaningless metric.  Nevertheless, he has released an update to HQ Player a mere 2 weeks later that includes a "mega" filter with 1 million taps for PCM and 16 million taps for SDM.

 

Go figure!

He also added a closed form filter after the Yggy came out. Doesn't mean he thinks it is better or necessary. Means he knows customers are interested in what it sounds like, and he is letting them compare and decide for themselves if a type of filter matches the manufacturer's hype. I think it's a real service, compare the sound without adding a complete DAC.