LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  October 2013

ARSCLIST October 2013

Subject:

Re: $1K DSD recorder

From:

Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 26 Oct 2013 07:22:31 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (99 lines)

Hi Ellis:

That is an interesting issue. If you ever do the math, please let us know your answer. I'm not sure 
there's any natural transient acting in an actual room that can rise much faster than that, but what 
about electronic instruments? Even with a sharp drum hit, there is some slowing of the wave front in 
air, plus whatever small physics issues are involved with the microphone itself, plus whether the 
mic preamp can catch the rise time in the first place, including the electroncs inside a condenser 
mic, if that's used. Going backwards in this thread, it could be that a muted trumpet close to a mic 
that can capture the attack would be the ultimate test for the whole system, both digital and 
analog. I remember my father saying that many lab tests of audio gear were useless because they 
weren't addressing real-world situations, but pulse tests were very useful because, as he put it 
"things in front of microphones definitely pulse," and produce voltages and currents very similar to 
what lab equipment can simulate. His beef about sine-wave tests was that only flutes tend to produce 
sine waves "and anything worth its salt" should have low or no distortion with sine waves.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ellis Burman" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 10:50 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] $1K DSD recorder


> Not only what listening environment outside of an anechoic chamber has 120
> dB dynamic range, but also what recording environment?  I'd imagine the
> breathing of the musicians would be well above that!
>
> True, a mic pre-amp is a much more demanding application for an op-amp than
> a line-level buffer.  Still, I'd be more concerned with the slew rate
> limits of the 5532.  In my mind, the whole idea of DSD is to capture
> transient information (at least that's what I hear with DSD or higher
> sample rates, or direct-to-disc recording for that matter.)  I haven't done
> the math though - maybe 9V/uS is fast enough, even at 5.6 MHz sample rate.
>
> Ellis
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
>> You two are more expert than I, but I think a 5532 is fine in this
>> application because you have built-in level limits by the nature of digital
>> zero. So as long as you can design your analog sections to accomodate low
>> distortion at digital zero (and leave a few dB headroom for over-sample
>> problems with rate and format conversions), then I'm not sure what audible
>> differences there would be in using a designer chip. Aren't the designer
>> chips more appropriate for mic preamps or inside condenser mics?
>>
>> With the high-resolution formats in the download world, I'm starting to
>> see marketing again based on crazy claims of dynamic range. Benchmark, a
>> company that can stand on its reputation, showed a new power amp at the AES
>> Convention. Their marketing hook is that they can demonstrate something
>> like a 120dB range from their noise floor to whatever distortion figure
>> they find objectionable. But, what listening environment outside of an
>> anacholic chamber has 120dB dynamic range? And what music that provides any
>> pleasure needs 120dB dynamic range? It's not good for your ears to be
>> exposed to 120dB above silence, but no one seems to talk about that. I
>> remember the dynamic range claims with early digital, which definitely had
>> a lower noise floor than any tape recorder. The problem was, when there was
>> sound, it often wasn't as good as the sound coming off the allegedly noisy
>> tape.
>>
>> -- Tom Fine
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stamler" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 6:48 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] $1K DSD recorder
>>
>>
>>
>>  On 10/25/2013 4:28 PM, Ellis Burman wrote:
>>>
>>>> But it's funny how manufacturers are still touting the NE5532 op-amp.  I
>>>> used them over 25 years ago in my designs for Quad Eight.  They're fine
>>>> (a
>>>> lot of legendary consoles used them - Neve, Quad Eight, SSL, etc) but
>>>> there
>>>> are many better op-amps available now.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, the good ol' 5532  has been surpassed in many ways by more recent
>>> designs -- but for an excellent balance of low noise and clean performance
>>> *at low price*, it's hard to beat.
>>>
>>> Peace,
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> -- 
> Ellis
> [log in to unmask]
> 818-846-5525
>
> 

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

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