|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
qoute-
How did I take it out of context? I was under the impression that you were saying that the 002 sounds better because it uses Firewire instead of PCI. Is that not right? Your impression (and previus statement) was that Firewire has nothing to do with sound quality, they just transmit data. Any noise in the chain affects the sound quality. Firewire has a standardized noise quality to meet to be certified a IEEE1394 device. The 001 PCI does not need to meet a recognized noise spec. What you had taken out of context was stating that if Firewire was 'better' than 001 PCI card, then with the thinking above, then it had to be better than the HD PCI systems. |
#82
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
Isn't bit rate the resolution? In other words the number of times that signal is referenced in the digital domain and sample rate how often it looks at the signal?
Since both analog or digital circuits can be represented mathematically it is easy to plot the effects and results with a minimal amount of points of reference but it requires a better design in the converter, higher sample rates allow for improvements in converter design to be more effective since it is looking at the signal more often almost like error correction since it is seeing more actual change in the signal and predicting less. What the higher sample rate really offers is the ability to design better converters. Improved number crunching in the software for the 96k and better converters would change the sound. This brings up another thought about the 001, which is what part of the circuit is in the breakout and what is on the PCI card. Is it split analog (breakout) and Digital (PCI)? If this is the case Digi could easily upgrade the 001 with a new PCI card just like MOTU did when the went from the 324 to the 424 card. That would be an interesting upgrade path.
__________________
URBAN MUSIC- (Hip Hop and R&B) |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
Quote:
__________________
"I'm one of the few people I know who knows the few people I know" - CL |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
Duardo is 100% right.
However, to go back into the real world, sampling at 96KHz DOES make a difference in frequencies under 20KHz, but only due to the filtering process of the A/D and D/A conversions. The higher the sampling rate, the lower the slope of the filtering, hence the less distortion around the cutoff frequency. So if you sample at 40KHz, you need a brickwall filter at 20KHz. Doesn't exist. If you sample at 80KHz, you need a brickwall filter at 40KHz, or a steep filter at 35KHz (and distortion around 35KHz is ok since we don't hear it). And so on: the higher the sampling frequency, the farther you push the distortion introduced by the converters in higher frequencies that we don't hear. That's the benefit of high sampling rates. The "better resolution" is not a benefit of the sampling rate, since we do NOT hear it. If you want a better resolution that you will hear, you'll need to increase the bit rate. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
1. 2 samples of a waveform is all that is needed to accurately capture it digitally and then have it recreated "exactly" by a good DA.
Only true of a sinusoidal waveform. Actually it's 2 samples for every cycle of the highest frequency component of your signal. If you have a 20 Hz pure tone, then 40Hz sampling is all you need (in theory. In practice, you'll want a little more to minimize the distortion introduced by the converter's filters). If, however, you have a 20Hz waveform that includes harmonics that are 500Hz, then you'll need 1KHz sampling rate, and so on. 2. Higher sample rates don't technically increase the resolution of any audio information less than 1/2 of the acutal sample rate. It is just a waste of samples in that area. 100% correct. It's redundant information. 3. Higher sample rates only increase the resolution of higher frequencies. (related to above). Right. 4. Higher sample rate converters CAN and/or DO sound better becuase: a - They can capture harmonic content above 20k Wrong: we can't hear it anyway. b - The low pass filters are around 96k and not as harsh in the more audible areas around 20k. Right for a 192KHz converter. The cutoff would actually be a little lower than 96KHz. c - They can be a newer higher quility converter than current 44.1/48k converters. That's usually right but that's another topic. d - They may have a beter clock making it seem that they higher SR is the reason for the beter sound. That's the same thing as {c} 6. I won't need 96/192k until those converters a way better than any available 44.1/48k converters. They already are! |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
Wow!!! This thread is...humbling! [img]images/icons/blush.gif[/img] It is a shame that even in university (I studied in music ten years ago) we are taught a simplification that seems to be a bit misleading.
|
#87
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
Quote:
There are PCI systems where that's not the case, like the M-Audio and Echo interfaces, where the box with the jacks is just a box with jacks, and the converters are actually on the PCI card. In that case, sure, you could have noise introduced over the PCI cable, since it's transmitting an analog signal to the PCI card. But that's not the way it works with the 001. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
-Duardo |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
Just a quick correction to my previous, earlier post: I was referring to the tc electronic 2290 digital delay that employs a 1MHz sampling rate. (not a model 1176, as erroneously stated, which is an analog compressor by a different manufacturer).
__________________
Ross Whitney [email protected] iMac 27 (2017) | OS 10.14.6) | 32 GB RAM | PT Native 2020 | Apollo Twin X I/O |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
Man, just when I thought these types of arguments were over!
One thing I can say about some conjecture of Converts sounding the same at any sample rate. We use a Radar system daily. Some consider it to be one of the better sounding digital recorders out there (I'm agree). I can say this without a doubt- The Radar sounds way better at 96K. And 192? Fahgetabouddit. Same clock. Same converters. Recording drums and acoustic guitar is night and day better at the higher rates. Night and day. And this baby sound great at 48. This is all I should ever need to say 192K is better, my ears. Now for the more analytical side. AD/DA converters all have errors. They all have some form of smoothing filters to reassemble the data. This all adds up to guesswork. Simply put, take a clearer picture in the first place, spend less time cleaning it up later using math for guessing what it should have been.
__________________
Mac Pro Rack - Ventura PT 23.12 HDX - MTRX Studio Mac M2 13" Air in the field |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't think it'll ever be perfect, but I think it's entirely plausible that we may reach the point where the differences are inaudible. I think some converters are there already...but I'm not sure all converters ever will be. I'm not sure they all want to be. -Duardo |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
003 Discontinued? | bootc | Pro Tools 10 | 58 | 12-05-2011 06:15 PM |
Is 003 really discontinued? | ripekeai | Pro Tools 9 | 15 | 03-29-2011 06:05 PM |
Digi 003 Rack Discontinued? | Tritono9 | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 12 | 06-04-2010 06:39 PM |
Digi 001 discontinued? | Dino Bonanno | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 1 | 01-13-2004 07:22 PM |
001 being discontinued??? | fabpab | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 5 | 11-10-2002 04:18 AM |