The example with the 7.5k sine wave is a good one but the analysis is faulty. It doesn't matter what the waveform looks like after conversion to digital. What matters is that the harmonics which are present in the digital representation of the waveform which are not present in the original sine wave are all higher than one half the sample rate and will therefore (in theory) be removed by the filter in the D to A converter. In practice, as has been stated here is that the filters are not perfect and neither is the clock. The lack of perfection in the filter and clock are what causes the harshness in digital sound. Filters and clocks are much better than they used to be and in high quality pro gear can be outstanding. Many lower quality and lower cost converters sound bad becasue of the poor quality of the filter and clock. As far as the problem being in the mixing not in the conversion: This can be true, it depends on the internal bit depth of the software/hardware combination that makes up your mixer. If you have only 24 bits internally and first reduce the level of your signal by 48 db and then reamplify it by the same amount you are left with a 16 bit signal rather than a 24 bit one. The system I use (ProTools) has an internal bit depth of 56 bits which is more than sufficient for extensive processing without fidelity loss. I assume most pro grade systems are similar in bit depth. The quality of the processing algorithms are very important as well. The Nyquist criterion is provable mathematically assuming perfect filters and clocks.
Message
Re: OT: Tales from an Audiophiles Crypt
2002-11-04 by paulhaneberg
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.