LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  March 2010

ARSCLIST March 2010

Subject:

Re: Disc EQ in the digital domain

From:

Eric Jacobs <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:58:12 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (121 lines)

On Wednesday, March 10, 2010 5:52 AM, Parker Dinkins wrote:

> on 3/9/10 8:42 PM US/Central, Eric Jacobs wrote:
>
>> Transfering FLAT will cost you about 6-7 bits of dynamic
>> range - an audible loss. EQ in the digital domain will
>> not recover that lost dynamic range.
>
> For a different conclusion, you might want to read
>
> Filter Reconstruction and Program Material Characteristics
> Mitigating Word Length Loss in Digital Signal Processing-
> Based Compensation Curves used for Playback of Analog
> Recordings
>
> By R.S. Robinson, Channel D Corp., Audio Engineering Society Paper
> 7185, Oct. 2007.

I'm not sure that the conclusion is different, but rather
candy-coated to some degree...

Keep in mind that the entire paper and its arguments are built
around modern vinyl LP media.

On Page 3, under "4. Program Characteristics", it reads:

    "In the high frequency region of the spectrum, the
     degree of extra headroom needed for recording
     uncorrected program material will depend on the
     frequency balance of the program material. The
     amplitude of program content above 1 kHz is critical,
     because that frequency range is pre-emphasized and
     will impact the effective dynamic range of lower
     frequencies. Therefore, it's useful to know about the
     frequency balance of typical, actual music LP
     recordings that have been emphasized with the RIAA
     compensation curve."

Keep in mind that shellacs and older recordings when
transferred FLAT have a frequency balance that is significantly
biased above 1 kHz when compared with a modern LP due to their
high frequency noise content. Therefore, the dynamic range of
lower frequencies on older recordings is going to be more
impacted than on a modern LP.

On Page 7, under "7. Upper Bound of Treble Headroom", we find:

    "For the exceptional example (Bob Marley and
     the Wailers) among the recordings surveyed, and
     shown here, this was a maximum of 17.5 dB (2.9
     bits). There also is the possibility that other, more
     extreme such examples exist and could be located, but
     they will be uncommon."

More extreme examples among LPs probably are uncommon, but
among shellacs and transcription discs, more extreme examples
are the norm with their clicks, crackle, and pops.

    "Given the results from the variety of recordings
     surveyed (most of which aren't presented here), and
     considering that the above figure represents an upper
     bound, a more likely typical loss of digital dynamic
     range due to treble emphasis, from the peak
     responding / peak hold analysis, is less than one bit
     (6 dB). It appears to be unlikely, in practice, to exceed
     this figure with LP music recordings on a consistent
     basis."

Again, all references in this paper by Robinson are vinyl
LP. Shellacs and transcription discs, with their noise
characteristics, will likely result in more than one bit
of loss. And 6 dB is audible.

On Page 8, under "6. Conclusion", it reads:

   "The reconstructive properties of digital de-emphasis filtering,
    as shown here, in conjunction with the characteristics of most
    program material, will cause a typical overall bass resolution
    truncation of only one bit or less..."

And again, this one-bit loss is what you'll find with LP program
material. I would expect more with pre-LP grooved media.

Finally, the article states:

   "Exceptional, uncommonly encountered program material may
    cause a worst case bass truncation of approximately three bits,
    which is negligible considering the 24 bit resolution capability
    of modern analog to digital converters."

This statement just glosses over the fact that losing three bits
in the bass (18 dB) is actually audible - not sonically negligible.

   "In cases where bass word length truncation does occur, the
    disadvantage is balanced by the complementary enhancement of
    digital resolution, due to treble preemphasis, in the frequency
    range where human hearing is at its most sensitive."

Does increased treble really make up for bass loss? This really
seems like a non-sequiter. But the article is called "Word Length
Loss *Mitigation*" - and mitigation is different from recovery.

This paper argues that for modern vinyl LPs, that digital EQ can
come very close to the very best analog EQ for less cost. It
does not say, or even imply, that digital EQ can match or exceed
the best analog EQ. It only says that the shortcomings of digital
EQ are relatively minor (for vinyl LPs). The gap between analog
and digital EQ is greater for pre-LP grooved media due its
greater high frequency noise component.

Food for thought anyway. <smile>

Eric Jacobs

The Audio Archive, Inc.
tel: 408.221.2128
fax: 408.549.9867
mailto:[log in to unmask]
http://www.TheAudioArchive.com
Disc and Tape Audio Transfer Services and Preservation Consulting

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager