Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
I cannot locate their web site, I am just re-directed to the av123
site which sells the units. Are they out of business? What about the room correction SW which P1A users are waiting for? What about active lodspeaker-toom correction? It is all silent and no appearent interest in the audio communicty, which seems to continue to tweak the system using cables while missing the big point )the room) Thanks marco stanzani |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
OK, some of us knew that. OTOH, answers to the other questions would be more interesting and useful. Kal Thanks Kal did somebody experienced the DeQX devices? Is SigTech still opearting with new prodocts (I still see Copyright 1996-2000 Cambridge Signal Technologies on their URL) Is TacT available with some more affordable products? Is Perp. tech providing the room correction services )this was their claim in Y2K but nothing happened so far (and AFAIK) Overall the BOM cost of digital correction systems is VERY low, so we are going to pay for the IP (which is OK). Still I feel very promising for the medium- to low-end system the technologt fallout in the near future. Still it does not seem to happen so near .. Thanks |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
Hello Andre,
(Andre Yew) wrote in : ... I disgree about the cost of room correction systems. Research seems to indicate that at least 1 second of room correction (or 1 Hz correction resolution) is desirable. At 44.1 kHz, and done with FIR filters, this amounts to about 44.1k*44.1k = 1.9 billion multiply and additions (MACs) per second, and over 8 billion MACs per second for 96 kHz processing, a sample rate at which many receivers and surround prepros are operating at today. That is well beyond affordable, and even achievable. Top-of-the-line Pentiums and Athlons can barely achieve Dhyrstone MIPS at half these numbers, and those numbers are unrealistic and inflated anyway, given that Dhrystone isn't a realistic, or even meaningful benchmark. ... I think you should take a look at this site: http://www.ludd.luth.se/~torger/brutefir.html Realtime FIR filtering with better than 1 Hz resolution at audio sampling rates is available since at least 5-8 years. A top-of-the-line processor should be able to run at least 30 channels at 96 Khz using a program like that. The main problem is that this convolution method is patented by Lake Audio, so it cannot be used outside free programs like the one above, but AFAIK the patent is going to expire within few months. If you use the program above with the following one: http://freshmeat.net/projects/drc/ (incidentally developed by me you can build a good quality room correction system almost for free. You can see some example results achieved with the program above, along with traditional room treatment, at the following URL: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s= 24df513b860d46cb4eb85577a6528c9a&threadid=283878&p erpage=20&pagenumber=16 And that's just for the implementation of the correction playback side. The measurement side that determines what needs to be corrected has its own set of challenges, which include a simple enough user ... I agree, making a good quality RCS is difficult, making it easy to use is near to impossible (DRC is definitely difficult to use). Bye, -- Denis Sbragion InfoTecna Tel: +39 0362 805396, Fax: +39 0362 805404 URL: http://www.infotecna.it |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
"Andre Yew" wrote in message
... I disgree about the cost of room correction systems. Research seems to indicate that at least 1 second of room correction (or 1 Hz correction resolution) is desirable. At 44.1 kHz, and done with FIR filters, this amounts to about 44.1k*44.1k = 1.9 billion multiply and additions (MACs) per second, and over 8 billion MACs per second for 96 kHz processing, a sample rate at which many receivers and surround prepros are operating at today. That is well beyond affordable, and even achievable. Top-of-the-line Pentiums and Athlons can barely achieve Dhyrstone MIPS at half these numbers, and those numbers are unrealistic and inflated anyway, given that Dhrystone isn't a realistic, or even meaningful benchmark. I agree that it's not as cheap as the previous poster was claiming. However, your argument using general processors is not valid. In the realm of DSPs and ASICs this level of processing power is certainly achievable at modest cost. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
"Dick Pierce" wrote in message
... (andy) wrote in message ... I cannot locate their web site, I am just re-directed to the av123 site which sells the units. No, Perpetual Technologies is alive and, apparently well. AV123 is run by the same guy who runs Perpetual Technologies, which is why you're directed to the AV123 website. That's a strange name for an audio company. Was it supposed to be "perceptual"? Norm Strong |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
"normanstrong" wrote in message
news:Gbtub.181649$ao4.610833@attbi_s51... That's a strange name for an audio company. Was it supposed to be "perceptual"? Nope, it was Perpetual. Run by a guy Mark Shifter (sp?) who harks back to Audio Alchemy. Snake oil is probably a tad harsh for AA...but there was some debates about their claims and products (DAC-in-a-box for one). Perpetual Technologies/AV123 on the other hand is supposed to have some good stuff. Their Rocket line of speakers enjoys a large internet following and review very well. They also have a high end reference series and some smaller HTiB systems. Designed here in the states and manufactured in China they are supposed to be very high quality for the buck. A "perpetual" comment is the Rockets hold their own both cosmetically and performance wise with speakers several times their price. The crossovers (patent pending) and drivers were designed by none other than Dick Pierce who is without reproach. As his client it appears Mark actually listening to what Dick said and got a good product as a result. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to perpetual technologies?
"Mkuller" wrote in message
news:58Pub.246217$HS4.2182771@attbi_s01... Snake oil is more than a "tad" harsh to call AA. Mark owned the company and had a very talented designer in the days when digital was evolving. They produced excellent products at great prices and their DTI jitter buster was a breakthrough product that is still in use today by people using separates. That may be true but I still think they weren't totally honest with some of their products. There should be no need for jitter correction in CD audio as has been pointed out by Dick Pierce and others that CD's can't have jitter. If a jitter buster helps then something is wrong with the CD player. Another example is a quote by Tom Nousaine in this newsgroup a few weeks ago: "I'm guessing that my experience with an Audio Alchemy outboard DAC might be illustrative. Using that device for a level matched test I discovered that the output of the AA was +10 dB compared to the analog output of a Marantz CD-63 player. Inside the case there was a jumper with 0 dB and +10 dB settings. Moving the jumper to the 0 dB position and, guess what, the output was still +4 dB. So to an end-user the device always delivered a higher output level. I'm guessing that this kind of level de-match accounts for practically all, if not exactly all, of the reported cd-player sound differences." |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Atlantic Technologies 5.1 => 7.1 -- what 2 speakers would be good to add on? | Audio Opinions | |||
Whatever happened to the "cheater" amps? | Car Audio | |||
what happened?? | Car Audio | |||
"The 9/11 Poll: What really happened? | Audio Opinions |