4 ms·

I used to believe this, based on the mathematical proof referred to. But every proof relies on assumptions, treated as axioms, ideally (but rarely) all noted.

by ncmncm 4y ago

I used to believe this, based on the mathematical proof referred to. But every proof relies on assumptions, treated as axioms, ideally (but rarely) all noted. This particular proof assumes that the clock is perfect, with no jitter or delay between one place it is used and another. There are more ways for a clock and uses of it to vary than you probably imagine possible. It also assumes the A/D and D/A converters produce exactly correct results, which none do. We expect them to be close enough. So in fact the output is as close to the same as the input as anybody cared to ensure, subject to cost, component tolerances, and amount of attention spared. In practice, it is almost always as close to exact as anybody listening cares about (and better than a phono needle could manage). But there are ways for digital systems to produce bad results, by happenstance, laxness, or just normal aging. Few ever check the calibration of their equipment.

naikrovek 4y ago
it's almost always far more than good enough for human ears. audiophiles' continuous search for "perfection" is pointless because human ears are not perfect. not by a long shot. I don't care who you are. just like how your eyes lie to you, so do your ears. 48kHz is not a difficult clock rate to maintain perfectly. at all. all you need is a DAC of regular every day commodity quality, and an equalizer if you think "warmth" is a quality of vibrating air.
- ncmncm 4y ago
  Lots of things are not especially difficult for someone paying attention to get right. But that doesn't mean they are always got right. Thermodynamically speaking, it is easier to have a digital system that fails to reproduce a sound waveform accurately than one that achieves it, because there is only one way to the right output, and uncountable ways for it to be wrong. So, even leaving aside gross incompetence (is that smart?), anything that could be sufficiently perturbed thermodynamically, e.g. by age or decay, could throw off your results. The great advantage of digital electronics is that they make most of the system relatively insensitive to commonly encountered thermodynamic effects, within limits. Most such effects that exceed limits make your thing just not work anymore. (We have all experienced this.) But some can have a more subtle result, some of those without even exceeding those limits. Fortunately, most of those involve only a few components. Those components are mostly only in your power supply, your amplifier, your DAC, and the clock circuit driving the digital stuff, including the DAC. Of those, the ones that make a difference to sound quality are mostly in the power supply and amplifier, which usually makes sound obviously bad, and the clock, which can make sound subtly bad. Fortunately, clocks involve very few components and those are not operated anywhere near physical limits, so they rarely go bad. Furthermore, most when they go a little bad don't affect the clock's output in any way that affects what it drives. Unfortunately, when they do, the effect on the sound you get may be hard to describe beyond "not right". Then, fortunately, you can swap out the whole subsystem with the clock in it to see if that is at fault. So the most usual danger from a dodgy clock or other source of subtle wrongness is that, as for the case of a needle dragged down a wiggling groove, you might get used to how that sounds, and want it all the time. And that can be hard to match in another system.

by ncmncm 4y ago

naikrovek 4y ago

it's almost always far more than good enough for human ears. audiophiles' continuous search for "perfection" is pointless because human ears are not perfect. not by a long shot. I don't care who you are. just like how your eyes lie to you, so do your ears. 48kHz is not a difficult clock rate to maintain perfectly. at all. all you need is a DAC of regular every day commodity quality, and an equalizer if you think "warmth" is a quality of vibrating air.

ncmncm 4y ago
Lots of things are not especially difficult for someone paying attention to get right. But that doesn't mean they are always got right. Thermodynamically speaking, it is easier to have a digital system that fails to reproduce a sound waveform accurately than one that achieves it, because there is only one way to the right output, and uncountable ways for it to be wrong. So, even leaving aside gross incompetence (is that smart?), anything that could be sufficiently perturbed thermodynamically, e.g. by age or decay, could throw off your results. The great advantage of digital electronics is that they make most of the system relatively insensitive to commonly encountered thermodynamic effects, within limits. Most such effects that exceed limits make your thing just not work anymore. (We have all experienced this.) But some can have a more subtle result, some of those without even exceeding those limits. Fortunately, most of those involve only a few components. Those components are mostly only in your power supply, your amplifier, your DAC, and the clock circuit driving the digital stuff, including the DAC. Of those, the ones that make a difference to sound quality are mostly in the power supply and amplifier, which usually makes sound obviously bad, and the clock, which can make sound subtly bad. Fortunately, clocks involve very few components and those are not operated anywhere near physical limits, so they rarely go bad. Furthermore, most when they go a little bad don't affect the clock's output in any way that affects what it drives. Unfortunately, when they do, the effect on the sound you get may be hard to describe beyond "not right". Then, fortunately, you can swap out the whole subsystem with the clock in it to see if that is at fault. So the most usual danger from a dodgy clock or other source of subtle wrongness is that, as for the case of a needle dragged down a wiggling groove, you might get used to how that sounds, and want it all the time. And that can be hard to match in another system.