|
Tweakers' Asylum Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ. |
|
|
|
Tweakers' Asylum Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ. |
|
In Reply to: Re: Digital sound posted by Steve Eddy on May 31, 2002 at 14:57:04:
A brickwall filter is naturally plagued with ringing (even an analog one), to satisfy Nyquist's theorem. But in regard to aural perception in the time domain, I think Nyquist's theorem is severely-flawed. For to make the square wave cleaner (and truer to the original signal), the theorem would have to be "violated" to some degree. I think the problem is Nyquist's theorem has been treated as if it is the end-all requirement for D/A (and A/D) conversion, and the notion of proper execution would enable perfect reproduction up to Fs/2... But this is true only in the frequency domain. (And with a steady-state signal.) Nyquist's theorem totally disregards the time response (transient response) aspect of D/A conversion.I personally think the Lanczos3 D/A filter algorithm would be the closest in regard to the least deviation from the original waveform, although some artifacts above Fs/2 would pass through the D/A process, violating Nyquist's theorem. But I personally think waveform fidelity brings superior performance, not just getting a perfectly-flat frequency response. In the case of Redbook D/A, the most-common means of attaining flat frequency response IMO **corrupts** waveform fidelity. In the name of superior measured specifications.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Digital sound - Todd Krieger 18:07:09 05/31/02 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
