Y
Yiannis_B
Guest
Δεν με πείθει ο τύπος......( Thorsten Loesch σχεδιαστής της AMR/iFi)
"True PCM audio recordings and playback used Multibit Analogue-to-Digital Converters (ADC) during recording and Multibit Digital-to-Analogue Converters (DAC). Such Multibit converters are complex and time-consuming and hence expensive to make, but they dominated the first decade of digital audio.
By comparison ADC’s and DAC’s of the Single-Bit / Bitstream type are much easier and thus cheaper to manufacture. The hardware (ADC and DAC Chip) market moved towards Single-Bit / Bitstream converters in the early 90’s and away from true PCM.
So ideally we play PCM back as PCM, with a true Multibit DAC (no matter what the original ADC source is – we invariably save one stage of manipulation and losses) "
http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-thorsten-loesch-amrifi-audiostream-addendum-pcm-vs-dsd
http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-thorsten-loesch-amrifi
Tubes subjectively sound better and listening to tubes makes us feel less stressed/more relaxed and brings one to be more emotionally connected to the music – which is something we are all in the pursuit of.
"True PCM audio recordings and playback used Multibit Analogue-to-Digital Converters (ADC) during recording and Multibit Digital-to-Analogue Converters (DAC). Such Multibit converters are complex and time-consuming and hence expensive to make, but they dominated the first decade of digital audio.
By comparison ADC’s and DAC’s of the Single-Bit / Bitstream type are much easier and thus cheaper to manufacture. The hardware (ADC and DAC Chip) market moved towards Single-Bit / Bitstream converters in the early 90’s and away from true PCM.
So ideally we play PCM back as PCM, with a true Multibit DAC (no matter what the original ADC source is – we invariably save one stage of manipulation and losses) "
http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-thorsten-loesch-amrifi-audiostream-addendum-pcm-vs-dsd
http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-thorsten-loesch-amrifi
Last edited by a moderator: