Help GoldenSound / GoldenOne Get An Audio Precision Analyzer

[PeterSt]

7 hours ago, GoldenOne said:

B: impossible they both have 120dB sinad.

 

11 minutes ago, manisandher said:

Haha... sounds familiar 😉.

 

Erm, you don't need that analyser to show differences. You need an other mindset than "but you won't be able to hear this" (under -120dB etc. etc. etc.).

 

Just saying : my mindset has been all right as long as I work on this stuff. I have that analyser as well; We create cables and DACs and what not, so I know what to expect. GoldenOne, by the time you need some pointers, just let me know. As long as you (or Chris) don't think I'm raining on your parade, it is fine.

 

I would have many first pointers, and I chose this one for today:

 

You won't get far without the experience of listening. Hence, you could see all kinds of spuria in contrary directions. It could take 10 years of reasoning out in writing to qualify them. For example, I wrote a few pages of essay on the subject of how the ultra lowest jitter clock (as in less than 1fs) sounded by far the worse (Mani may recall it). Later I proved with my own normal NOS1 ((rated at a theoretical 200fs) that tapping on the floor already implied jitter-changes (rated at a theoreticsl 200fs). I think I have screenshots of that. Again later I visited a university and observed a whatever it was low jitter requiring tiny device (I think it was telescope lense), assembled in a 5 meter wide and 7 meter high shock-absorber assembly, weighing a couple of tons. The jitter to achieve in there was higher than what I tried out with that ultra low jitter clock. ... I returned that clock.

 

So you see, like with the easy to understand turn table, DACs already can't be measured in a static environment. It requires music to play in order to catch the hammering of the sound waves via the floor and cabinet on to the oscillator(s). Measure without that and you'd having nothing of value. For Mani ... the NOS1 floating on water ... (many many pages of fun to begin with).

Leave out these more or less prerequisites and you'd measure the wrong thing.

 

Not-so-much-doable.

But from me too, the best of luck !

And most certainly ready to help, because the idea most certainly is fresh.

[PeterSt]

55 minutes ago, GoldenOne said:

I believe the oscillator is still up to 200khz

 

There has to be a typo somewhere. 🤪

[PeterSt]

5 minutes ago, GoldenOne said:

so it should be fine :P

 

Of course it is fine. It is only that no oscillator of 200KHz or 192KHz etc. will be in there.

 

sine oscillator is 5hz to 204khz

 

Maybe they call it like that. But if so, that would be a (signal) generator. Thus something else again.

Oscillators in this realm will be in the xxMHz range.

 

And the LF oscillator in a synth should be able to go as low as 0.05Hz (preferably much lower). Haha.

 

The gist is clear: these (24 bit) machines still don't go beyond a useful range of 96KHz. Strange actually; Already 10 years or so back I asked "so what about DAC's being able to do 786KHz ? isn't it time that you dunk in an ADC doing that ?". ... The ADC's did not exist of course (not for 24 bits). This has changed now. ... I suppose AKM is not good enough for them ?

 

So Yes, I have been contemplating how my RME could be supplemental (I still did not unpack it).