Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Actually, someone *did* build a genuine 24-bit DAC, but since it had
an input impedance of 50 ohms and a FFFF output level of 10 volts rms
(for obvious reasons), and dissipated several hundred watts, it didn't
stand much chance of becoming a commercial reality!

erm... isn't FFFF 16 bits? I think you need FFFFFF for a 24 bit at FSD.


--
"Get a paper bag"

Tim S Kemp wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:


Actually, someone *did* build a genuine 24-bit DAC, but since it had
an input impedance of 50 ohms and a FFFF output level of 10 volts rms
(for obvious reasons), and dissipated several hundred watts, it didn't
stand much chance of becoming a commercial reality!


erm... isn't FFFF 16 bits? I think you need FFFFFF for a 24 bit at FSD.


Arrgh

There are 10 sorts of people in the world, those that understand binary
and....

But my fave,

2 + 2 = 5 (for large values of 2).

--
Nick

"Tim S Kemp" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

Vinyl which is limited to 13 bit resolution, hasn't made any progress
in more than 30 years. Why whine about a medium with almost an order
of magnitude more resolutioin?

Mic preamps, active microphones, and venues commonly used for
recording fall way short of 16 bit resolution as well.

pedant

The resolution of an analogue device is, by its nature, infinite.

Yet another under-educated analog bigot who obviously never heard of a guy
named Claude Shannon.

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:28:16 -0000, "Tim S Kemp"
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Actually, someone *did* build a genuine 24-bit DAC, but since it had
an input impedance of 50 ohms and a FFFF output level of 10 volts rms
(for obvious reasons), and dissipated several hundred watts, it didn't
stand much chance of becoming a commercial reality!

erm... isn't FFFF 16 bits? I think you need FFFFFF for a 24 bit at FSD.

Oooops! Quite right, still had my CD hat on! :-(
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:15:46 -0000, "Tim S Kemp"
wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:

Vinyl which is limited to 13 bit resolution, hasn't made any progress
in more than 30 years. Why whine about a medium with almost an order
of magnitude more resolutioin?

Mic preamps, active microphones, and venues commonly used for
recording fall way short of 16 bit resolution as well.

pedant

The resolution of an analogue device is, by its nature, infinite.

The resolution of an analogue device is, by its nature, tied to its
noise floor. Please don't let's get into this utter ******** again!

Your
statement is, of course, wrong, and assumes that you are using 16 bits to
resolve a dynamic range of about 96 dB...

Properly dithered 16 bits has a full bandwidth dynamic range of about
93dB. You might argue the resolution to be anything you like,
depending on what bandwidth you choose for the noise floor. At the
full 22kHz, it's 93dB. Compare and contrast with that of analogue
vinyl, which is about 70-75dB on the best day of its life.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:17:34 -0000, "Tim S Kemp"
wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

This is why you'll usually try and
screen off a drum kit in some way.

and screens are why drummers hate soundmen...

Oh please! Drummers hate *everyone*!! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article ,
Tim S Kemp wrote:
This is why you'll usually try and
screen off a drum kit in some way.

and screens are why drummers hate soundmen...

Fact of life, I'm afraid. Of course it might be nice to beef up the
acoustic sections of the band so they weren't needed, but...

--
*Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim S Kemp wrote:
The resolution of an analogue device is, by its nature, infinite

Not so. At the very least it's shuffling around electrons, and they have a
finite size.

--
*Young at heart -- slightly older in other places

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Tim S Kemp" wrote in message


Your
statement is, of course, wrong, and assumes that you are using 16
bits to resolve a dynamic range of about 96 dB...

Ignorance of Claude Shannon, part 2.

The usual equation for the dynamic range of a system with N bits is:

DR = 1.8 + 6.02 * N

This works out to be 98 dB for 16 bits. That's close enough to "about 96
dB"...

Here are some independent references supporting this claim:

http://www.enpacksystems.com/enpacks...mitsuicdr.html

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/ageco/product/dynamic_range.htm

http://www.seis.com.au/TechNotes/TN200410A_SNR.html

http://www.planetanalog.com/showArti...cleID=12802479

http://www.maxim-ic.com/tools/calcul...id/maxim_sinad

http://www.hsdal.ufl.edu/Projects/In...Technology.doc

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

The resolution of an analogue device is, by its nature, infinite.

The resolution of an analogue device is, by its nature, tied to its
noise floor. Please don't let's get into this utter ******** again!

The resolution of any signal recording and reproduction device is the number
of different output values it can reproduce. So if it's analogue it's
infinite - however it also has a noise floor and a maximum output. As does
digital equipment. However if (say) there is 1uV of noise and 1V peak
deflection then a 16 bit device can resolve /less/ points than a 24 bit
device between those points. An analogue device with the same range could
resolve infinite points on that scale.


--
"Get a paper bag"