Jump to content

pkane2001

  • Content Count

    4278
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United States

4 Followers

About pkane2001

Recent Profile Visitors

5645 profile views
  1. No. 0dBFS applies to all waveforms, it cannot be exceeded.
  2. As @March Audio said, the RMS value varies with the waveform. Peak value corresponding to 0dBFS is the maximum output.
  3. It is clear that the document is referring to devices that have at least an analog input or an analog output, including devices accepting or producing a digital representation of the signal. In other words, analog devices, as well as, devices containing ADCs and/or DACs.
  4. Didn't read the document, but from your quote, it's just saying that analog input/output required to produce a full-scale signal (at input or output) is to be reported as the RMS voltage of a sine wave, rather than its peak value. For example, when 0dBFS is reported to require 2v input, this means 2v RMS, not peak. The actual voltage that produces 0dBFS is then the peak value of about 2.8v.
  5. If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? What is the sound of one hand clapping? Is Schrödinger's cat alive or dead if nobody checks? (I know -- this one's a stretch...) What does digital audio sound like if it's never converted into analog? All very good questions, no doubt, but what do they have to do with -10dBV? 🤷‍♂️
  6. This is called crest factor, which is specifically peak-to-RMS ratio.
  7. Why ignore? We very rarely use devices such as DACs, amps, etc., at their nominal output level, unless you never adjust volume. While it may be useful to also measure at nominal level, it's not that you must ignore all other measurements, as long as these are consistent. Most DACs I've measured, for example, measure better at 2v output than at 0.316, the same with head-amps simply due to better SNR.
  8. John, you keep saying static EQ doesn't make sense with dynamic processing, which is true. Nevertheless, the decoder produces a consistent static frequency change across all the processed tracks. This can't be the effect of dynamic processing, since that would change based on the signal and wouldn't be the same across two different recordings. For whatever reason, there's a static frequency curve that appears to be applied to all decoded content. That's what Klaus has been reporting, and that's what I've been saying to you for a while, even in our previous private conversations. Although the c
  9. Yes, linear phase correction in DW if phase is not selected, so you're right, if minimum phase filters were used this will not undo them fully. Engaging phase correction will, though, but I think this will just negate all the main effects of the decoder :) I did listen to a couple of tracks, RAW, Decoded, and de-EQed by DW. I think the latest decoder does a better job with frequency balance, although to me, there's an overemphasis on upper-mid frequencies. Vocals sound brighter than they should, a bit more sibilance. Not something unexpected if you look at the frequency bump from
  10. Klaus, not sure if you've tried it, but this is what I do to de-EQ John's files. I simply use DeltaWave to match the RAW and Decoded file, and use non-linear level EQ correction only (uncheck phase). The result is to undo the large-level EQ in processed files. You can then play or export the corrected files. Here's an example: Uncorrected EQ (RAW vs. DEC): After DeltaWave frequency correction: But, I'm thinking this will make the decoded files sound a lot more like their RAW versions. At least it does to me when listening to these.
  11. I've interacted with Klaus on forums and privately for a while now, and have a good sense of his technical ability and skills. He's not a stalker or a troll, he has deep background in audio and understands signal processing and analysis. While we don't always agree on all the technical points, he's never been disrespectful or acted in any way other than being completely professional in our interactions.
  12. That is a mischaracterization of @KSTR and it is really unfortunate that his technical and subjective reports are being actively erased.
  13. Try a similar thread on ASR. I’ve missed the posts here, but @KSTR did post his listening notes and analysis there ... which also didn’t end well.
  14. Frank must be glueing the optical cable in, to make sure it makes the best possible contact. Right Frank? That would make it difficult to swap ;)
×
×
  • Create New...