On 20 May 2004 19:39:31 -0700, (Curious)
wrote:

Ben Bradley wrote in message . ..
On 19 May 2004 20:15:45 -0700, (Curious)
wrote:

But I am not doing A/D. I have a CD-ROM that can extract digital audio
from the CD itself rather than recording from the CD.

Oh, THAT explains it. You're playing a commercial audio CD recorded
or remastered within the last ten years or so. And the distortion is
coming from the CD.

Nothing wrong with the CD.

I'm sure the CD is giving you the same bits that the engineers and
producers put on it and intended to be there, so there's nothing wrong
with it in the most reductionistic techical sense. But in the sense of
the CD carrying a good, clean, clip-free recording, there's plenty
wrong with it.

The original sound is recorded loudly. The
song is "We Live". The singer is Bosson.

Have you loaded it into a .wav editor and seen what the waveform
looks like? Does it look like any of those in the article on the
recent Rush CD?

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH YOUR EQUIPMENT. oops, sorry, didn't
mean to yell...

Furthermore, there is nothing you can do about the situation with
the CD's you have. The appropriate thing to do is complain to the
record label about the sound, but don't hold your breath waiting for
them to release a 'fixed' copy.

This all seems too simple - can you explain your application in
more detail? Why do you need to "increase the clipping point?"

I want loud music w/out the clipping. I don't like the "red" when I
play through my computer software. Clipping has the effect of making
me "feel sorry" for the system. It makes the music depressing. I also
get the creepy feeling that something in the computer is getting
physically damaged because of the clipping.

Okay, you don't have to worry about that last thing, even if you
already 'know' that you can't damage anything thay way. All that can
really be damaged is the music, and most unfortunately, it is ALREADY
damaged on the CD.

You mean the "song" is damaged. Cuz it was originally recorded at that
high volume.

Yes, the music, the song, the recording is damaged.

Some songs are just recorded loudly. Time travel would be necessary to
correct that.

What would be neccesary is to change the attitude of the major
labels. Without that, they'd still make it clip. What happened here is
NOT an accident, it was intentional.

I don't really hear the clipping, however, I still get worried when
the "red" is hit.

You may not hear blatant clipping, but I'm sure it doesn't sound as
clean as it could have. Go to a used CD store and get a CD or two made
15 years ago (not a recent re-release of music over 15 years old, but
where the actual CD was made and sold back then), and compare it to
the CD's that are showing clipping. With an older CD, he clip light
will rarely if ever come on, and the sound will be cleaner.
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of Directors.

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of Directors.

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of Directors.

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of Directors.

In rec.audio.tech,comp.dsp, Richard Owlett
wrote:

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of Directors.

Not to discourage such actions, but it's not like it's one
offending label. They've all been doing it, more and more over the
years. Here's another page on the topic:

http://www.mindspring.com/~mrichter/...s/dynamics.htm
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

In rec.audio.tech,comp.dsp, Richard Owlett
wrote:

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of Directors.

Not to discourage such actions, but it's not like it's one
offending label. They've all been doing it, more and more over the
years. Here's another page on the topic:

http://www.mindspring.com/~mrichter/...s/dynamics.htm
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

In rec.audio.tech,comp.dsp, Richard Owlett
wrote:

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of Directors.

Not to discourage such actions, but it's not like it's one
offending label. They've all been doing it, more and more over the
years. Here's another page on the topic:

http://www.mindspring.com/~mrichter/...s/dynamics.htm
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

In rec.audio.tech,comp.dsp, Richard Owlett
wrote:

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of Directors.

Not to discourage such actions, but it's not like it's one
offending label. They've all been doing it, more and more over the
years. Here's another page on the topic:

http://www.mindspring.com/~mrichter/...s/dynamics.htm
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

Ben Bradley wrote in message . ..
You may not hear blatant clipping, but I'm sure it doesn't sound as
clean as it could have. Go to a used CD store and get a CD or two made
15 years ago (not a recent re-release of music over 15 years old, but
where the actual CD was made and sold back then), and compare it to
the CD's that are showing clipping. With an older CD, he clip light
will rarely if ever come on, and the sound will be cleaner.

The song "We Live" was made in 1999. That is the year Bosson made the
original recording.

Ben Bradley wrote in message . ..
You may not hear blatant clipping, but I'm sure it doesn't sound as
clean as it could have. Go to a used CD store and get a CD or two made
15 years ago (not a recent re-release of music over 15 years old, but
where the actual CD was made and sold back then), and compare it to
the CD's that are showing clipping. With an older CD, he clip light
will rarely if ever come on, and the sound will be cleaner.

The song "We Live" was made in 1999. That is the year Bosson made the
original recording.

Ben Bradley wrote in message . ..
You may not hear blatant clipping, but I'm sure it doesn't sound as
clean as it could have. Go to a used CD store and get a CD or two made
15 years ago (not a recent re-release of music over 15 years old, but
where the actual CD was made and sold back then), and compare it to
the CD's that are showing clipping. With an older CD, he clip light
will rarely if ever come on, and the sound will be cleaner.

The song "We Live" was made in 1999. That is the year Bosson made the
original recording.

Ben Bradley wrote in message . ..
You may not hear blatant clipping, but I'm sure it doesn't sound as
clean as it could have. Go to a used CD store and get a CD or two made
15 years ago (not a recent re-release of music over 15 years old, but
where the actual CD was made and sold back then), and compare it to
the CD's that are showing clipping. With an older CD, he clip light
will rarely if ever come on, and the sound will be cleaner.

The song "We Live" was made in 1999. That is the year Bosson made the
original recording.

"Ben Bradley" wrote in message
...
In rec.audio.tech,comp.dsp, Richard Owlett
wrote:

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of
Directors.

Not to discourage such actions, but it's not like it's one
offending label. They've all been doing it, more and more over the
years. Here's another page on the topic:

http://www.mindspring.com/~mrichter/...s/dynamics.htm
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

I don't disagree that CD mastering practices are far below perfection, but I
believe the OP has something else going on. He seems to be complaining of
inadequate playback volume, overtly gross distortion (probably due to some
sort of attempt to compensate for the lack of volume), and out of a general
misunderstanding of the principles involved, is searching for a magic bullet
to fix those problems. I think something on his sound system is broken or
mis-configured.

"Ben Bradley" wrote in message
...
In rec.audio.tech,comp.dsp, Richard Owlett
wrote:

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of
Directors.

Not to discourage such actions, but it's not like it's one
offending label. They've all been doing it, more and more over the
years. Here's another page on the topic:

http://www.mindspring.com/~mrichter/...s/dynamics.htm
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

I don't disagree that CD mastering practices are far below perfection, but I
believe the OP has something else going on. He seems to be complaining of
inadequate playback volume, overtly gross distortion (probably due to some
sort of attempt to compensate for the lack of volume), and out of a general
misunderstanding of the principles involved, is searching for a magic bullet
to fix those problems. I think something on his sound system is broken or
mis-configured.

"Ben Bradley" wrote in message
...
In rec.audio.tech,comp.dsp, Richard Owlett
wrote:

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of
Directors.

Not to discourage such actions, but it's not like it's one
offending label. They've all been doing it, more and more over the
years. Here's another page on the topic:

http://www.mindspring.com/~mrichter/...s/dynamics.htm
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

I don't disagree that CD mastering practices are far below perfection, but I
believe the OP has something else going on. He seems to be complaining of
inadequate playback volume, overtly gross distortion (probably due to some
sort of attempt to compensate for the lack of volume), and out of a general
misunderstanding of the principles involved, is searching for a magic bullet
to fix those problems. I think something on his sound system is broken or
mis-configured.

"Ben Bradley" wrote in message
...
In rec.audio.tech,comp.dsp, Richard Owlett
wrote:

Ben Bradley wrote:
[snip]
The music industry 'standards' for making a CD have changed in the
past decade or so. A song that sounds 'louder' is, at first listen,
deemed more interesting and exciting, so it will sell more CD's than a
clean-but-not=as-loud song, so record labels are making songs sound
louder to increase sales. Yes, they're sacrificing sound quality to
make more money.


Sounds as if OP should write a forceful, but polite, complaint letter
to the offending label. Don't bother with "customer relations"
[whatever they call it]. Send it to CEO or Chairman of Board of
Directors.

Not to discourage such actions, but it's not like it's one
offending label. They've all been doing it, more and more over the
years. Here's another page on the topic:

http://www.mindspring.com/~mrichter/...s/dynamics.htm
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

I don't disagree that CD mastering practices are far below perfection, but I
believe the OP has something else going on. He seems to be complaining of
inadequate playback volume, overtly gross distortion (probably due to some
sort of attempt to compensate for the lack of volume), and out of a general
misunderstanding of the principles involved, is searching for a magic bullet
to fix those problems. I think something on his sound system is broken or
mis-configured.

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...
No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.

How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...
No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.

How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...
No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.

How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...
No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.

How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

On Mon, 24 May 2004 10:39:25 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...mplifiers.html

Have a look at some parts:
http://focus.ti.com/docs/search/vpar...e&templateId=3

Regards,
Allan.

On Mon, 24 May 2004 10:39:25 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...mplifiers.html

Have a look at some parts:
http://focus.ti.com/docs/search/vpar...e&templateId=3

Regards,
Allan.

On Mon, 24 May 2004 10:39:25 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...mplifiers.html

Have a look at some parts:
http://focus.ti.com/docs/search/vpar...e&templateId=3

Regards,
Allan.

On Mon, 24 May 2004 10:39:25 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...mplifiers.html

Have a look at some parts:
http://focus.ti.com/docs/search/vpar...e&templateId=3

Regards,
Allan.

"Jerry Avins" wrote in message
...
Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message
...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

PWM is analog. The fact that it's switched confuses a lot of people. The
pulse width is an analog quantity. The fact that distinction between digital
and analog can be blurred just underscores the similarity of the two
technologies in terms of mathematical signal analysis.

"Jerry Avins" wrote in message
...
Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message
...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

PWM is analog. The fact that it's switched confuses a lot of people. The
pulse width is an analog quantity. The fact that distinction between digital
and analog can be blurred just underscores the similarity of the two
technologies in terms of mathematical signal analysis.

"Jerry Avins" wrote in message
...
Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message
...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

PWM is analog. The fact that it's switched confuses a lot of people. The
pulse width is an analog quantity. The fact that distinction between digital
and analog can be blurred just underscores the similarity of the two
technologies in terms of mathematical signal analysis.

"Jerry Avins" wrote in message
...
Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message
...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

PWM is analog. The fact that it's switched confuses a lot of people. The
pulse width is an analog quantity. The fact that distinction between digital
and analog can be blurred just underscores the similarity of the two
technologies in terms of mathematical signal analysis.

Allan Herriman writes:

On Mon, 24 May 2004 10:39:25 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...mplifiers.html

I stopped reading when I got to the part where he stated an amplifier
was "transparent but not neutral". What B.S.
--
% Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your
%%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow."
%%%% % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr

Allan Herriman writes:

On Mon, 24 May 2004 10:39:25 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...mplifiers.html

I stopped reading when I got to the part where he stated an amplifier
was "transparent but not neutral". What B.S.
--
% Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your
%%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow."
%%%% % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr

Allan Herriman writes:

On Mon, 24 May 2004 10:39:25 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...mplifiers.html

I stopped reading when I got to the part where he stated an amplifier
was "transparent but not neutral". What B.S.
--
% Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your
%%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow."
%%%% % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr

Allan Herriman writes:

On Mon, 24 May 2004 10:39:25 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:

Steve Underwood wrote:

Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message ...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...mplifiers.html

I stopped reading when I got to the part where he stated an amplifier
was "transparent but not neutral". What B.S.
--
% Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your
%%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow."
%%%% % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr

Karl Uppiano wrote:

"Jerry Avins" wrote in message
...

Steve Underwood wrote:


Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message

...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?


PWM is analog. The fact that it's switched confuses a lot of people. The
pulse width is an analog quantity. The fact that distinction between digital
and analog can be blurred just underscores the similarity of the two
technologies in terms of mathematical signal analysis.

Thank you for putting what I meant into better words.

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Karl Uppiano wrote:

"Jerry Avins" wrote in message
...

Steve Underwood wrote:


Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message

...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?


PWM is analog. The fact that it's switched confuses a lot of people. The
pulse width is an analog quantity. The fact that distinction between digital
and analog can be blurred just underscores the similarity of the two
technologies in terms of mathematical signal analysis.

Thank you for putting what I meant into better words.

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Karl Uppiano wrote:

"Jerry Avins" wrote in message
...

Steve Underwood wrote:


Hi Jerry,

Jerry Avins wrote in message

...

No DAC I'm aware of can provide enough power to drive a loudspeaker. You
need an analog amplifier between a DAC and the speaker. If you don't
have one now, that's your problem.


How would you classify the new generation class D amps that go
straight from 16/24 bit audio to the speaker terminals? The only
digital to analogue conversion in those is right at the speaker.

Regards,
Steve

What I surmise is that PCM is converted to a variety of PWM. I call that
conversion to analog. The high power comes later. The input is signed
binary; the output is bipolar. What you refer to as A/D conversion in
the loudspeaker I call low-pass filtering.

Maybe my notion of how the device works is entirely wrong. Where can I
read about it?


PWM is analog. The fact that it's switched confuses a lot of people. The
pulse width is an analog quantity. The fact that distinction between digital
and analog can be blurred just underscores the similarity of the two
technologies in terms of mathematical signal analysis.

Thank you for putting what I meant into better words.

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯